Bombay High Court
Jagdish S/O Meghjibhai Seth vs Prashant S/O Laxminarayan ... on 15 February, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
1 wp902.21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.902 OF 2021
Jagdish S/o Meghjibhai Seth,
Aged about 68 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o "Ram Kunj", Shrawagi Plot,
Akola, Tq. and Distt. Akola. ...PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
Prashant s/o Laxminarayan Jaiswal,
Aged about 48 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Shrawagi Plot, Near Tower, Umari Road,
Akola, Tq. and Distt. Akola.
...RESPONDENT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri D.R. Khapre, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri N.L. Jaiswal, Advocate for respondent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED :- 15th FEBRUARY, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT
Though this writ petition is coming for the first time
before the Court, Shri N.L. Jaiswal, learned counsel is appearing
suo motu for the sole respondent.
(2) Looking to the question involved in this writ petition, in
my view, it can be decided at admission stage finally.
(3) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of the parties.
(4) Heard Shri Digvijay R. Khapre, learned counsel for
petitioner and Shri N.L. Jaiswal, learned counsel for respondent.
2 wp902.21.odt
(5) The respondent is the original plaintiff and the
petitioner is the original defendant. On earlier occasion the
petitioner was required to approach this Court by filing Writ
Petition No.98 of 2021, since his application below Exhibit - 132
in Small Cause Suit No.9 of 2013 was rejected.
(6) On 19.01.2021, the said writ petition was allowed by
giving direction to the learned Trial Court to decide the Small
Cause Suit No.9 of 2013 by 10.03.2021.
(7) It is submitted before this Court that as per the
direction given by this Court on 19.01.2021, the Superintendent
of Property Tax, Municipal Corporation, Akola has appeared along
with necessary documents and his evidence is recorded.
Thereafter, the matter was fixed for final hearing on 11.02.2021.
On the said day an application for adjournment was moved below
Exhibit -151 on behalf of the petitioner/defendant seeking 15
days' time, in view of the fact that Advocate Dilip Goenka is tested
COVID-19 positive. The learned Judge of the Court below has
granted the said application however for only three days on the
ground that this Court has directed to decide the suit by
10.03.2021. Hence, this writ petition.
3 wp902.21.odt
(8) It is not disputed before this Court that counsel for the
defendant, who was appearing in the suit was tested COVID-19
positive. The world is suffering from the COVID-19 pandemic. No
doubt true that this Court has directed the learned Judge shall
decide the Small Cause Suit No.9 of 2013 by 10.03.2021 however
while giving that direction this situation was not like the situation
as on 11.02.2021. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to
interfere with the order dated 11.02.2021.
(9) The writ petition is allowed. The order dated
11.02.2021 passed below Exhibit-151 in Small Cause Suit No.9 of
2013 is hereby quashed and set aside. The application below
Exhibit - 151 in Small Cause Suit No.9 of 2013 is hereby allowed.
The Small Cause Suit No.9 of 2013 is to be posted on 15.03.2021
for arguments.
(10) Needless to mention, the time limit given by this Court
in Small Cause Suit No.98 of 2013 is extended till 09.04.2021.
Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to costs.
JUDGE
Wagh
