Court No. - 30
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2253 of 2019 Petitioner :- Smt. Kanti Devi Alias Kanti Rani And 4 Others Respondent :- Jagdish Lal Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Byas Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Abhishek Misra
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard Sri V.B. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri H.P. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Abhishek Misra, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record.
Present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 1.1.2019 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Court No. 3 in Misc. Appeal no. 43 of 2018 (Jagdish vs. Kanti Devi and others).
By the impugned order the lower appellate Court has allowed the appeal filed by the plaintiff challenging the order whereby interim injunction application was rejected. By the impugned order the lower appellate Court has directed the parties to maintain status quo and has further directed that no third party rights shall be created by any of the parties.
Challenging the order, submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that suit was filed after about 48 years. The names of the defendants are continuing in the revenue record and nothing was done by the plaintiff to get the mutation entries corrected and the cancellation of sale deed executed in favour of the defendant no. 1 is not under challenge and therefore, there is no prima facie case in favour of the respondent.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has supported the impugned order by submitting that at the time of execution of alleged sale deed plaintiff no. 1 was a minor and the lower appellate Court has rightly observed that sale deeds that are being relied on clearly reflect that sale deed more than the actual area was executed.
Be that as it may, this Court is of the opinion that once the order of status quo and that no third party rights shall be created is applicable to both the parties, no prejudice is caused to any of the parties. As such, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order.
At this stage, learned counsel for the parties agree that the suit itself may be directed to be decided expeditiously.
Accordingly, it is provided that the trial Court may make every endeavour to decide the suit expeditiously by fixing short dates and no unnecessary adjournments shall be granted to either of the parties.
Learned counsel for the parties undertake that both the parties shall cooperate in disposal of the suit.
In case any adjournment is sought by any of the parties after two adjournments, the adjournment shall be granted after imposing heavy cost not less than Rs. 1,000/- per adjournment.
Present petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid observations/directions. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Abhishek