Sudhir Agarwal vs Vijay Kumar Agarwal And 11 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 3444 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 37
 

 
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 441 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Sudhir Agarwal
 
Respondent :- Vijay Kumar Agarwal And 11 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- J.P. Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Sanjay Singh,Amrendra Nath Rai
 

 
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for both the parties have made a joint request that the suit proceeding may be expedited and since the suit is of the year 2000 and pleadings have been exchanged between the parties, this Court thinks it proper to direct for its expeditious disposal. Accordingly, following directions are issued:

A). If the issues have already been framed the limitation issue or any other issue as may be desired by the parties may be framed afresh as observed in this judgment.

B). After the issues are framed, the trial court will proceed to record the evidence of the plaintiff and ensure that plaintiff concludes his evidence within a period of sixty days from the date of production of certified copy of this order and the defendants cooperate in recording of evidence of plaintiff within the time prescribed by this Court;

C). After evidence of plaintiff is recorded and evidence comes to close, the Court will proceed to record the evidence of the defendants within the next three months' time as the defendants are large in number and will ensure that plaintiff cooperates in conclusion of the evidence of the defendants within the time prescribed by this Court; and

D). After conclusion and closure of evidence by both the parties to the suit, the trial court will proceed to conduct final hearing of the suit and decide the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of ten months, however in the order of other expedited suits, pending before it.

It is clarified that in the event, this order could not be carried out within the time frame fixed, for any technical reason, then for such delay in disposal of the case and pendency thereof itself shall ordinarily not be a ground sufficient enough to fasten the authority concerned with any personal liability of contempt.

Order Date :- 2.2.2023

Deepika