Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: 340 application in Rajinder & Ors. vs Harsh Vohra & Ors. on 1 December, 2009Matching Fragments
5. On 18th January, 2007, the petitioners/plaintiffs filed application under Order 10 of the CPC and another application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. A separate file was started for the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. The matter was adjourned to 14th March, 2007. On 14th March, 2007, the suits were adjourned to 25th April, 2007 and thereafter to 12th May, 2007.
6. The order dated 12th May, 2007 in the suit files is of some significance and is therefore reproduced herein below:
"12/05/2007 Present: Counsels for both the sides. Put up on 24th May, 2007 with the connected files."
The order of 12th May, 2007 in the separate file made on the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. is that arguments thereon had been addressed by the counsel for the petitioners herein.
7. On 24th May, 2007, the counsel for the respondents addressed arguments on the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. and the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. was posted for order on 5th July, 2007. In the suit files the order of 24th May, 2007 is for putting up the same along with the file of application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. on 5th July, 2007.
8. On 5th July, 2007, application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed. The suits were adjourned for hearing of the applications under Order 14 Rule 5 and under Order 10 of the CPC for 16th October, 2007.
9. The petitioners against the order dated 5th July, 2007 of dismissal of their application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. filed an appeal to this Court titled as "Criminal Appeal" and registered as Criminal Appeal No.460/2007. The same was admitted vide order dated 13th August, 2007 and notice thereof issued; the operation of the order dated 5th July, 2007 was stayed. Vide order dated 30th September, 2008 in the said criminal appeal, the Trial Court record comprising not only of the file of application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. but of all the four suits were ordered to be summoned to this Court on an application of the petitioners in this regard. The files were accordingly received in this Court. A perusal of the suit file shows that though they were listed on 16th October, 2007 for hearing on the applications under Order 14 Rule 5 and Order 10 of the CPC but the petitioners sought an adjournment on the ground of having preferred criminal appeal No.460/2007 in this regard. The said criminal appeal was listed before this Court on 3rd February, 2009 when it was ordered that the same was not maintainable as a criminal appeal but as a FAO. Accordingly, the same was ordered to be converted into FAO No.25/2009 and was vide order dated 12th October, 2009 ordered to be listed along with CRP No.183/2007.
13. From the proceedings on the suit files as set out herein above, it is apparent that the petitioners/plaintiffs gave precedence to the application under Order 340 of the Cr.P.C. over the applications under Order 14 Rule 5 and Order 10 of the CPC. It is also clear from the Trial Court records before this Court that arguments were addressed on 12th May, 2007 & 24th May, 2007 on the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. only of which a separate file had been made and in which separate ordersheet had been maintained and no arguments were addressed on that date on the applications under Order 14 Rule 5 and Order 10 of the CPC in the suit file. The said files were on both the dates merely adjourned with the connected file i.e. the file of the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. However, after the said applications had been dismissed vide order dated 5th July, 2007 and the file of the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. thus closed, order was made in the suit file for listing the matter on 16th October, 2007 for hearing of applications under Order 14 Rule 5 and Order 10 of the CPC.