This order directs the trial court to dispose of an eviction suit expeditiously within 12 months, citing excessive and unguided adjournments and the petitioner's advanced age.
Direction to the trial court to dispose of the eviction suit within 12 months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8731/2018
Rameshwar Prasad S/o Late Shri Suwalal Tailor by Caste Tailor, Aged About 84 Years, R/o Newai, Tehsil Newai, Distt. Tonk (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
Newai, Distt. Tonk (Raj.) 2. Devendra Kumar S/o Shri Harinarayan by Caste Jain Chanwariya, R/o Newai, Distt. Tonk (Raj.) ----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Sandeep Jain.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA
Order
08/05/2018
The case of the petitioner-plaintiff (hereinafter ‘plaintiff’) is that a suit for eviction was filed on 21.03.2014. The defendants not unusually are creating obstructions in its disposal. Adjournments are sought and casually granted by the trial court without regard to Order 17 CPC. Resultantly, the eviction suit is presently, even after lapsing of 4 years, at the stage where even the issues have not been framed. It has been submitted that the trial court in the circumstances be directed to dispose of the plaintiff’s eviction suit expeditiously.
Heard. Considered.
Order 17 CPC limits adjournments and requires visitation of costs where adjournments sought are not justified. The Apex Court in the case of M/s.Shiv Cotex Vs. Trigun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. & Others [(2011)9 SCC 678] has held that adjournments should
(2 of 2)
[CW-8731/2018]
ordinarily be limited to three/ four times in the life of a suit. The fact however remains that the CPC provides for multiple applications. However it is for the trial court take an appropriate view on the misc. applications, no sooner they are filed and where the application is found vexatious or frivolous only to stall the trial, visit the applicant with exemplary costs.
This petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the trial court to dispose of the plaintiff’s underlying suit for eviction particularly as the plaintiff is over 80 years old within a period of 12 months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
(ALOK SHARMA),J
Karan/10
3 issues framed by the court
Whether pending suit proceedings should be expedited due to excessive adjournments and age of the plaintiff.
Whether the trial court's liberal grant of adjournments without just cause warrants intervention.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a directed disposal of the eviction suit within a specified timeframe.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M/s.Shiv Cotex Vs. Trigun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. & OthersReferred¶14
M/s.Shiv Cotex Vs. Trigun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. & Others [(2011)9 SCC 678] · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rameshwar Prasad S/o Late Shri Suwalal Tailor
Banwari S/o Hari Narayan
Devendra Kumar S/o Shri Harinarayan
Allok Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
