Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 16 views

    Order: (1) in The High Court of Judicature For Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench Jaipur

    Uploaded by

    Manoj
    The petitioner filed a civil suit in 2012 that has not proceeded according to the Code of Civil Procedure due to over 48 adjournments granted casually at the defendants' request. As a result, the suit remains pending at the stage of plaintiff's evidence despite three affidavits being filed. The petitioner seeks directions for expedited hearing of the suit. The court holds that ordinarily not more than three adjournments should be granted as per Supreme Court precedent. It directs the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously and not grant casual adjournments, but only those supported by a formal written application with reasons recorded. The writ petition is disposed of with these directions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Order: (1) in The High Court of Judicature For Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench Jaipur

    Uploaded by

    Manoj
    16 views2 pages
    The petitioner filed a civil suit in 2012 that has not proceeded according to the Code of Civil Procedure due to over 48 adjournments granted casually at the defendants' request. As a result, the suit remains pending at the stage of plaintiff's evidence despite three affidavits being filed. The petitioner seeks directions for expedited hearing of the suit. The court holds that ordinarily not more than three adjournments should be granted as per Supreme Court precedent. It directs the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously and not grant casual adjournments, but only those supported by a formal written application with reasons recorded. The writ petition is disposed of with these directions.

    Original Description:

    A cited case law from India

    Original Title

    Het Ram 4-12-2013

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The petitioner filed a civil suit in 2012 that has not proceeded according to the Code of Civil Procedure due to over 48 adjournments granted casually at the defendants' request. As a result, the suit remains pending at the stage of plaintiff's evidence despite three affidavits being filed. The petitioner seeks directions for expedited hearing of the suit. The court holds that ordinarily not more than three adjournments should be granted as per Supreme Court precedent. It directs the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously and not grant casual adjournments, but only those supported by a formal written application with reasons recorded. The writ petition is disposed of with these directions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    16 views2 pages

    Order: (1) in The High Court of Judicature For Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench Jaipur

    Uploaded by

    Manoj
    The petitioner filed a civil suit in 2012 that has not proceeded according to the Code of Civil Procedure due to over 48 adjournments granted casually at the defendants' request. As a result, the suit remains pending at the stage of plaintiff's evidence despite three affidavits being filed. The petitioner seeks directions for expedited hearing of the suit. The court holds that ordinarily not more than three adjournments should be granted as per Supreme Court precedent. It directs the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously and not grant casual adjournments, but only those supported by a formal written application with reasons recorded. The writ petition is disposed of with these directions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.

    20257/2013
    (Hetram Vs. Lal Hans & Ors.)

    (1)
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
    JAIPUR

    ORDER
    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.20257/2013
    (Hetram Vs. Lal Hans & Ors.)
    Date of Order :
    04.12.2013
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA
    Mr. Iliyas Khan, for the petitioner.
    BY THE COURT
    The petitioner-plaintiff (hereinafter 'the plaintiff') is
    aggrieved of the casual nature of adjournments in Civil Suit
    No.3/2012 before the Civil Judge (Jr.Div.) Mahuwa, District
    Dausa filed on 17.01.2012.
    It has been submitted by the counsel for the plaintiff
    that the said suit for permanent injunction in which defendants
    have been served and issues have been framed on 24.04.2012 is
    not proceeding as per the mandate of CPC and over 48 dates
    have been granted on the mere askance of the defendants in the
    suit. Consequently, it has been submitted that the matter still
    continues to remain pending at the stage of the plaintiff's
    evidence and in spite of affidavits in evidence of three witnesses
    having been filed, no progress has taken place in the said suit for
    over a year and half. It has been prayed that directions be issued
    for expedited hearing of the suit.
    Heard the counsel for the plaintiff and perused the
    writ petition.

    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.20257/2013


    (Hetram Vs. Lal Hans & Ors.)

    (2)

    The prayer made by the plaintiff is unexceptional. The


    Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Shiv Cotex Versus

    Tirgun Auto Plat P. Ltd. & Others [2011 AIR SCW 5789]
    has held that ordinarily not more than three adjournments in the
    matter of civil proceedings should be granted. It is therefore
    directed that the plaintiff's suit No.3/2012 pending before the
    Civil Judge (Jr.Div.), Mahuwa, District Dausa be disposed of
    expeditiously keeping in mind the mandate of the Hon'ble
    Supreme court in the case of M/s. Shiv Cotex (Supra). It is
    directed that causal adjournments sought ought not to be
    granted for the mere asking. Adjournments may however be
    granted on a formal written application and for reasons recorded
    by the trial court.
    The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid
    directions. Stay application also disposed of.
    MS/-

    (ALOK SHARMA), J

    All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.Manoj Solanki, Jr. P.A.

    You might also like