Court No. - 18
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5912 of 2018 Petitioner :- Irsad Respondent :- Civil Judge (Senior Division) Kushinagar Padrauna And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Brahmanand Singh
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to private respondent.
The defendant-petitioner is before this Court for a direction to first respondent to decide Suit No.536 of 2010 (Jalaluddin v. Nizamuddin & Ors.) within stipulated period.
Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner states that plaintiff-respondent had instituted Original Suit No.536 of 2010 in which an exparte injunction order has been passed in his favour. After receiving notice in the matter the defendant- petitioner has proceeded to file his written statement on 13.9.2010. It is contended that since then either one reason or other the objection so filed by the defendant-petitioner has not been decided and as such it is requested that the suit may be directed to be expedited.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Shiv Cotex Versus Tirgun Auto Plast P. Ltd and others, 2011 (89) ALR 232, has made the following observations:-
".................It is high time that courts become sensitive to delays in justice delivery system and realize that adjournments do dent the efficacy of judicial process and if this menace is not controlled adequately, the litigant public may lose faith in the system sooner than later. The Courts, particularly Trial Courts, must ensure that on every date of hearing, effective progress takes place in the suit."
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the writ petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to first respondent to consider and decide the interim injunction application in the aforesaid suit in question after considering the objection so filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, except upon payment of cost. The court below would also make an endeavour to decide the suit in question expeditiously.
Order Date :- 21.8.2018 SP/