Shri.Krishnapada Dhali Vs Shri. Samir Bepari and Anr.

The petitioner being the plaintiff in Title Suit No. 108 of 2017 pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division at Port Blair has filed the present application praying for a direction upon the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division for disposal of the suit within a specific time.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that on the earlier occasion also plaintiff had filed an application before this Court being CO No. 005 of 2020 praying for expeditious disposal of the suit and by an order dated 17^th January, 2020 this Court has disposed of the said application by requesting the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division to dispose of the suit within a period of six

¶14

2

¶15

months from the date of communication of the order without granting any unnecessary adjournment.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-plaintiff submits that in spite of the direction passed by this Court the suit has not yet been disposed of. She submits that the plaintiff intended to examine the Tehsildar, Little Andaman and the plaintiff has taken several steps for issuance of summons to the Tehsildar for appearance as witness but in spite of receipt of summons the Tehsildar has not appeared and the learned Court has issued the warrant against the witness but in spite of the warrant, the Tehsildar is not appearing.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-plaintiff submits that the suit is pending since the year 2017 and prays for an order for expeditious disposal.

¶18

Per contra , Ms. Shefali Kishen, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party-defendant prays for time on the ground that her senior is not in position to appear before this Court due to some personal difficulties.

¶19

This Court finds that the petitioner has filed the present application praying for a direction of expeditious disposal of the suit. On earlier occasion also this Court had directed the learned Judge for disposal of the case within a period of six months from the date of communication of the order but five years has been passed from the date of the order but till date the suit has not been disposed. This Court also finds that the Tehsildar is not appearing in spite of the

¶20

3

¶21

warrant issued by the Court as witness on behalf of the plaintiff.

¶22

Considering the above, the application filed by the petitioner is disposed of by directing the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Port Blair to dispose of the suit within a period of six months from the date of communication of the order without granting any unnecessary adjournment either of the party.

¶23

This Court finds that Tehsildar is not appearing in spite of receipt of the summon and even after issuance of warrant of arrest. The Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman is directed to take appropriate action against the Tehsildar, Little Andaman why he is not appearing before the learned Court in spite of the receipt of the summon and issuance of warrant of arrest.

¶24

The petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman for information and compliance.

¶25

CO/32/2025 is disposed of.

¶26

( Krishna Rao, J. )

Shri.Krishnapada Dhali v. Shri. Samir Bepari and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri.Krishnapada Dhali v. Shri. Samir Bepari and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kesoram Industries Limited(Prop. of Kesoram Spun Pipes & Fou Vs Mr. Prabhunath Singh & Ors.

Anubandh Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Skipper Furnishing Pvt. Ltd.

Dhancot Fibres Pvt. Limited Vs Manoj Uttamchand Zamad

M/S Laxmi Stores Rep by Manohar Lall Vs Vinay Lall

Pradip Kayal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Srikanta Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.