The court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order from 2004 under CPC Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, citing the 12-year delay and the absence of justification for interference.
The writ petition is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORDER
SB CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3412/2005
OFFICER, SIKAR, DISTRICT SIKAR (RAJASTHAN)
....PETITIONERS
VERSUS
... RESPONDENTS
26.10.2016
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI
Mr Shivraj Singh, Dy GC - for the petitioner/s
BY THE COURT:
2
By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 12.8.2004 passed on the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC.
A period of 12 years has already been passed after the impugned order and presumption goes about disposal of the civil suit itself. In any case, there remains no justification now to interfere in the impugned order after lapse of 12 years when parties are maintaining status as is directed by the court below.
In the result, writ petition is dismissed.
(MN BHANDARI), J.
bnsharma
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ court should interfere with an order passed 12 years prior given the presumption of disposal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH REGIONAL FOREST OFFICER, FATEHPUR
DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER AND DISTT.FOREST OFFICER, SIKAR
CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,RAASTHAN
RANGER NAKA INCHARGE, LAXMANGARH
COLLECTOR, SIKAR
DALLA RAM SON OF LICHMANRAM
MN BHANDARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
