The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Vineet Saxena
2021 Latest Caselaw 2964 MP

                                1
           THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          R.P.190/2021
                The State of M.P. v. Vineet Saxena

                     Through Video Conferencing.

Gwalior, Dated : 05.07.2021.

      Shri Deepak Khot, Counsel for the applicant/State.

      Shri Shailendra Singh Kushwaha, Counsel for respondent.

This PUD has been received from the court of 13 th ADJ,

Gwalior with covering letter of District Judge, Gwalior for extension

of time.

It appears that suit under Section 307 (5) of Municipal

Corporation Act is pending before the court of 13 th ADJ, Gwalior .

MP. No. 2639/2020 which was filed by the respondent seeking

direction to the trial Court to decide the suit without any further

delay. Accordingly the Miscellaneous Petition was allowed with the

following observations:-

"Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that any direction to the Trial Court is warranted for early disposal of the appeal. It is for the counsel for the parties to cooperate with the Trial Court by arguing the matter through video conferencing.

Accordingly, it is directed that the Trial Court shall make every endeavour to decide the trial within a period of four months from the receipt of certified copy of this order, provided co-operation is extended by Counsel for both the parties.

Counsel for the parties are also directed to appear before the Trial Court through video conferencing. They are directed not to stay away from the Court proceedings which are being taken up through video conferencing.

With the aforesaid observations, this

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH R.P.190/2021 The State of M.P. v. Vineet Saxena

petition is finally disposed of."

As per the PUD, the order passed by this court on 1.10.2020

was received by trial Court on 8.10.2020. It appears that the trial

Court did not proceed with the matter on the ground that the

Contempt Petition No. 415/2017 is pending before the High Court.

It appears that the respondent Vineet Saxena had filed a suit for

Specific Performance of Contract which was dismissed by judgment

and decree dated 18.12.2013. Against the said judgment respondent

Vineet Saxena has filed First Appeal No. 52/2014 and by order dated

27.3.2014 an interim order has been passed to maintain status and

accordingly, it is prayed that the time may be extended to conclude

the proceedings within a period of one month from the date of

disposal of contempt petition.

Considered the PUD sent by the Court below.

In MP No. 2639/2020, the respondent Vineet Saxsena had not

pointed out about the pendency of litigation between the parties as

well as about interim order passed by this Court in F.A. No. 52/2014

as well as about the pendency of the contempt petition, specifically

when the First Appeal and Contempt Petition has been filed by

Vineet Saxena.

Under these circumstances, the PUD sent by the court below is

allowed. The trial Court is directed to decide the suit within a period

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH R.P.190/2021 The State of M.P. v. Vineet Saxena

of one month from the date of production of copy of final order in

Contempt Petition no.415/2017.

With aforesaid observations, PUD is disposed of

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge ar ABDUR RAHMAN 2021.07.09 18:30:03 +05'30'