Registered Trust Maheshwari Kunj ... vs Surendra Das @ Suresh Das And 3 ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3649 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1924 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Registered Trust Maheshwari Kunj Nyas Mohalla Govind Dev Vrindavan
 
Respondent :- Surendra Das @ Suresh Das And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinayak Mithal
 

 
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

Heard Sri Sagar Mehrotra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vinayak Mithal, counsel for the defendant-petitioner.

The petitioner has preferred the present petition inter-alia with the following prayer:-

"A. Issue an appropriate order or direction to call for the record and to direct the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mathura to forthwith conclude the final hearing of Original Suit No. 276 of 2015 (Surendra Das & Anr. Vs. Registered Trust Maheshawari Kunj & Ors) as expeditiously as possible."

It appears from perusal of the record that Original Suit No. 276 of 2015 (Surendra Das & Anr. Vs. Registered Trust Maheshawari Kunj & Ors) for permanent prohibitory injunction was filed against the petitioner for his eviction from the property in question. The aforesaid suit was filed in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mathura. Since the aforesaid suit was not decided, the present petitioner filed a Matter Under Article 227 No. 6143 of 2017(Registered Trust Maheshwari Kunj Nyas vs. Surendra Das Alias Surendra Das And 3 Others) before this Court. The aforesaid petition was finally decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 09.10.2017. By the aforesaid order, the court below was directed to conclude and decide the aforesaid suit as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one year. Order dated 09.10.2017 is reproduced below:-

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed, notices need not go to the private respondent.

The applicant has approached this Court to expedite the proceedings of Original Suit No.276 of 2015 (Surendra Das @ Suresh Das and another vs. Registered Trust Maheshwari Kunj Nyas, Mathura) for permanent prohibitory injunction against the petitioner from evicting the plaintiff-respondent forcefully from the property in question pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Mathura.

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 above, this petition stands disposed of with the direction upon the Court concerned to expedite the proceeding of pending Original Suit No.276 of 2015 (Surendra Das @ Suresh Das and another vs. Registered Trust Maheshwari Kunj Nyas, Mathura) and conclude the same, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order, without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, except upon payment of cost."

Inspite of the same no further proceedings were initiated in the aforesaid suit on the pretext that S.L.P. (Civil) No. 14430-14433/2017 is pending between Radha Sharan Dubey and other Vs. Ram Niwas (D) before the Supreme Court.

It is argued that due to the pendency of the aforesaid S.L.P. the suit could not be decided as per the order dated 09.10.2017 passed by this Court in Matter Under Article 227 No. 6143 of 2017 (Supra).

In view of the aforesaid, the following order was passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Matter Under Article 227 No. 8932 of 2019 (Registered Trust Maheshwari Kunj Nyas vs. Surendra Das @ Suresh Das And 3 Others):-

"1. Sri Vinayak Mithal, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned special counsel for the High Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that plaintiff in the original suit are not party before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) NO. 14430-14433/2017 which is pending between Radha Sharan Dubey and other Vs. Ram Niwas (D) Through LRS and others. As per report since there are orders of status quo by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Sri Mithal admits that this order is operating but submits that petitioner is party before the Supreme Court but the plaintiff of the suit is not a party.

4. In view of such facts, no effective writ can be issued and it is open to the plaintiff or the defendant to approach the Supreme Court bringing out correct status of the parties and if need be implead the parties if they are so advised i.e. plaintiff in the S.L.P.

5. As per above, when it has been informed by the concerned Civil Judge (JD) that in view of order of status quo by the Hon'ble Supreme Court no orders could be passed by such court on the merits of the case, it will be proper for the parties to approach Hon'ble Supreme Court and seek their indulgence rather than filing this writ petition.

6. In view of such facts, no effective relief can be granted in the writ petition and writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner, if so advised, may approach the Hon'ble Supreme Court for appropriate directions."

After the aforesaid order was passed, an application was filed by the present petitioner before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. On the said application, following order was passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 01.02.2021:-

"Heard learned counsel for the parties.

It is clarified that the interim order passed by this Court on 09.05.2017 enures to the benefit of Radha Sharan Dubey and Shiv Sharan Dubey who are occupying Shop Nos.12 and 14. It is also made clear that the interim order does not enure to the benefit of any other tenant(s).

The interlocutory application stands disposed of accordingly."

The aforesaid order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court was placed before the court below and thereafter the court below was pleased to direct that the matter be taken up on 06.02.2021. On 06.02.2021 the matter could not be taken up due to the fact that advocates are abstaining from work. The next date fixed by the court below is 23.03.2021. It appears from perusal of the record that vide order dated 09.10.2017 the court below was directed to decide the suit in question within a period of one year. More than three years has already been lapsed till date no final decision has been taken on the same.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mathura to consider and decide the aforesaid suit in accordance with law expeditiously and positively within a period of nine 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, if there is no legal impediment.

Order Date :- 16.3.2021

Swati