Prehlad vs Sunita Devi And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 5715 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Prehlad vs Sunita Devi And Others on 13 March, 2024

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037255




130.                                 2024:PHHC:037255
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                          Civil Revision No.1557 of 2024
                                          Date of Decision: 13.03.2024

Prehlad                                                        ... Petitioner


                                 Versus


Sunita Devi and others                                      ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURBIR SINGH


Present:     Mr. Kamal Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner.
                                 ----

GURBIR SINGH, J. (Oral)

1. Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of

the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to the learned Appellate

Court, Faridabad to decide the stay application filed by the petitioner-

defendant No.1 along with appeal, in a time bound manner.

2. In a suit filed by respondents No.1 and 2-plaintiffs for

mandatory injunction and mesne profits, vide judgment and decree dated

09.01.2024 passed by the trial Court, petitioner along with pro forma

respondents No.3 and 4 herein (defendants in the suit), were directed to

hand over the vacant possession of portion of house, in question, within a

period of three months. However, mesne profits were not granted. Against

the said decree, defendant No.1-Prehlad filed appeal along with an

application for staying the operation of judgment and decree passed by the

trial Court. Notice in the appeal and application for stay was issued on

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037255

25.01.2024 for 07.02.2024, on which date, respondents No.1 and 2

appeared and the case was adjourned to 14.08.2024 for arguments on merits

in appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that without

passing any order on the stay application, case was adjourned for a long

date. It is submitted if the stay application is not adjudicated in time, he

would suffer irreparable loss. Learned counsel submits that at this stage,

petitioner would be satisfied if his application for stay is decided

expeditiously in a time bound manner.

4. I have heard the submissions of learned counsel for the

petitioner and have gone through the file.

5. Without commenting anything on the merits of the case,

present revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned

Appellate Court to decide the application filed by the petitioner-defendant

No.1 for staying the operation of the impugned judgment and decree dated

09.01.2024 within a period of one month, in accordance with law. The

Court may, if necessary, prepone the matter after giving notice to the other

party through counsel.

(GURBIR SINGH) JUDGE March 13, 2024 sanjeev Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037255

2 of 2