Uttarakhand High Court
Zameel Ahmad And Others vs Mohd Usman And Others on 7 September, 2016
Author: V.K. Bist
Bench: V.K. Bist
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2492 of 2016
Zameel Ahmad & others. .....Petitioners
Versus
Mohd. Usman & others. ....Respondents
Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Dated: 7th September, 2016
Hon'ble V.K. Bist, J.
Petitioners filed Original Suit No. 205 of 2014 before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Roorkee, District Haridwar for cancellation of sale deed dated 29.04.2014 in favour of respondent no. 1. The said suit was also filed for permanent injunction against the respondent no. 1 not to interfere in the property in question. Alongwith the said suit, an application was also moved by the petitioners under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. Same was registered as 6C2. The trial Court heard the 6C2 application filed by the petitioners and rejected the same on 01.09.2015. Against the order dated 01.09.2015, the petitioners filed Civil Appeal before District Judge. The said appeal was transferred to the Court of Ist Additional District Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar and was numbered as Misc. Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2015. Alongwith the said appeal, application for interim relief was also moved by the petitioners. On 28.09.2016, the learned Ist Additional District Judge, 2 Roorkee registered the said Misc. Civil Appeal and fixed 02.11.2015 for hearing. Since then, many dates have been fixed; but the Ist Additional District Judge has not taken any decision on the interim relief application filed by the petitioners.
2. Though this writ petition has been filed against the order dated 01.09.2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Roorkee, District Haridwar in Suit No. 205 of 2014; but, request has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, at bar, that direction may be issued to the Ist Additional District Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar to take final decision in the said Appeal itself at the earliest. Learned counsel for the petitioners requested that the parties may also be directed to maintain status quo over the property in dispute.
3. I have considered the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 01.09.2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Roorkee, District Haridwar, by which the 6C2 application moved by the petitioners under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. has been rejected. Against the said order, statutory appeal has already been filed by the petitioners and the same is pending consideration before the Ist Additional District Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar. In such situation, the writ petition moved by the petitioners cannot be entertained at all; but, the Court is 3 surprised to note that even no decision has been taken by the Ist Additional District Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar on the interim relief application moved by the petitioners. The concerned Court should have taken decision on the interim relief application moved by the petitioners at the earliest. I have also perused the order sheet of Misc. Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2015. From the perusal of the order sheet, it transpires that all the respondents have been served and they have also put an appearance before the concerned Court and from 02.11.2015 till date, the Ist Additional District Judge, Roorkee has not taken up the interim relief application filed by the petitioners. In fact, the Misc. Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2015 can also be decided by him at the earliest, inasmuch as, the documents have already been filed in the said Appeal and, moreover, the said Appeal is against the order by which 6C2 application filed by the petitioners under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 was rejected.
4. In such circumstances and in the interest of justice, I dispose of the writ petition by issuing direction to the Ist Additional District Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar to decide the interim relief application filed by the petitioners within a period of 15 days' from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. The learned Ist Additional District Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar is also requested to decide the Misc. Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2015 pending before him at the earliest.
45. Let a certified copy of this judgment be issued within 24 hours.
(V.K. Bist, J.) 07.09.2016 Arpan