Court No. - 36
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 9070 of 2018 Petitioner :- Buddhu Lal Respondent :- Ixth Additional District Judge, Room No.16, Allahabad And 08 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Jitendra Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
The legal position as placed by learned counsel for the petitioner that with the admission of the regular first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 the execution of the decree ought to have been stayed by the first appellate court, is not disputed by learned counsel for the respondents herein.
Only submission made by him before this Court is that the appellant/judgment debtor is trying to delay the proceedings of the First Appeal No.91 of 2013 (Buddhu Lal & Anr. v. Rikhi Ram). He has taken repeated adjournments as a result of which, the appeal could not be decided as yet. The prayer made by learned counsel for the respondents is to issue a direction to the first appellate court to decide the appeal within a stipulated period.
To this submission, learned counsel for the petitioners raises no objection.
In view thereof, the present petition is being disposed of with the direction to the first appellate court to make an endeavour to decide the First Appeal No.91 of 2013 (Buddhu Lal & Anr. v. Rikhi Ram), as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order. The execution of the judgement and decree dated 16.2.2013 passed in Original Suit No.1914 of 2000 (Rikhi Ram v. Buddhu Lal) would be subject to the result of the First Appeal No.91 of 2013.
However, it is made clear that in case of any unnecessary adjournment sought by the appellant, the first appellate court would be within its jurisdiction to impose adequate cost and pass appropriate orders, to remedy the situation.
Order Date :- 22.2.2019 Jyotsana