Disposed

Mahesh Chand and Ors. v. Ramkishore Sharma

Rajasthan HC17 Apr 2018CW/7952/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner-defendant sought no interference with the impugned order but urged the trial court to dispose of the underlying suit within 18 months and strictly regulate adjournments and miscellaneous applications.

What did the court decide?

Trial court directed to dispose suit within 18 months; adjournments regulated; miscellaneous applications decided within 3 days.

Mahesh Chand and Ors. Vs Ramkishore Sharma — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7952/2018

¶3

Mahesh Chand S/o Shri Ramjilal @ Lallu, B/c Brahmin, Aged About 47 Years 2. Smt. Suji Devi W/o Shri Ramjilal Bhadu @ Lallu, B/c Brahmin 3. Manju Devi W/o Maheshchand, B/c Brahmin, All R/o Village Andhi, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur, Rajasthan

¶4

----Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

Ramkishore Sharma Son of Late Shri Jagannath Sharma, by Caste Brahmin, Resident of Mohalla Lakhera, Near Saligramji Chaturbhuj Ka Mandir, Village Andhi, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur. At Present R/o House No. 3631, Deenanath Ji Ki Gali, Fifth Crossing, Chandpole Bazar, Jaipur ----Respondent

¶7

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Mohammed Anees.

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶9

Order

¶10

17/04/2018

¶11

Counsel for the petitioner-defendant (hereinafter

¶12

‘defendant’) submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if the petition is disposed of without interfering with the impugned order dated 09.02.2018 but directing the trial court to dispose of the underlying suit for permanent injunction and declaration filed by the respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter ‘plaintiff’) within a period of 18 months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order as the pendency of the suit is a cloud over the defendant’s right to the suit property.

¶13

The prayer of counsel for the petitioner is reasonable.

¶14

In the circumstances while not interfering with the impugned order dated 09.02.2018, the trial court is directed to dispose of

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CW-7952/2018]

¶17

the suit for permanent injunction and declaration filed by the plaintiff within a period of 18 months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order. Adjournments in the matter not be granted without just cause and should, when warranted be by a reasoned order on a proper application being filed to the satisfaction of the trial court. Further miscellaneous applications be decided as far as possible within three days of filing and when found frivolous be visited with costs. Further on adjournments sought during the trial the trial court to follow Order 17 Rule 1 CPC as also the observations of the Apex Court in the case Shiv Cotex Vs. Tirgun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. & Others [(2011) 9 SCC 678], where it has been noted that adjournments should ordinarily be limited to three/ four times in a suit.

¶18

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶19

(ALOK SHARMA)J.

¶20

Karan/122

Mahesh Chand and Ors. v. Ramkishore Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Chand and Ors. v. Ramkishore Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pratap Singh Vs Shri Anand Kumar and Others

Yogendra Singh and Ors. Vs Smt Bidam Devi and Ors.

Javed Khan and Anr. Vs Ahsan Khan

Gopal Puniya and Anr. Vs Rakesh Gattani and Ors.

Babu Lal Sharma Vs Mangi Lal Saini through Lrs

Nandlal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp