Uttarakhand High Court
Hon'Ble Vivek Bharti Sharma vs Mangal Singh & Others' Pending Before ... on 18 March, 2024
Author: Vivek Bharti Sharma
Bench: Vivek Bharti Sharma
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPMS No.722 of 2024
Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.
Mr. Mohit Kumar and Ms. Meenu
Kashyap, Advocates for the petitioner.
2. By means of this writ petition,
petitioner seeks the following relief:-
(i) Issue a writ, order or direction to expedite
the proceeding of Stay Application i.e.
paper no.6-Ga filed in Civil Appeal No.11
of 2024 'Madan Singh & another vs.
Mangal Singh & others' pending before the
court of District Judge, Rudrapur, District
Udham Singh Nagar as expeditiously as
possible.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction directing the
respondents to maintain status quo in the
property in question till the pendency of
stay application i.e. paper no.6-Ga before
the District Judge, Rudrapur, District
Udham Singh Nagar.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner
would submit that the petitioner filed a suit
for permanent injunction being O.S. No.36
of 2015 against the respondents/defendants;
that, by judgment/order dated 12.02.2024,
suit was dismissed; that, being aggrieved,
petitioner/plaintiff has filed an appeal along
with a stay application.
4. It is the grievance of the
petitioner/plaintiff that the appellate court,
without hearing the stay application, has
simply admitted and issued notices to the
respondents/defendants and has fixed the
date for hearing on 27.03.2024; that, if the
stay application is not heard at an early date
the purpose of filing the appeal would
frustrate.
5. It is admitted fact that the next date
fixed in the appellate court for hearing is
27.03.2024 and that the appeal itself has
been filed on 04.03.2024.
6. That apart, during the pendency of
stay application in the appellate court, the
petitioner/plaintiff in the present writ
petition besides seeking relief for
expeditious disposal of stay application is
also seeking direction to the respondents to
maintain status quo.
7. Recently, a Constitution Bench of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in re "High Court
Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P. &
Ors. in Criminal Appeal No.3589 of 2023 with
Special Leave Petition (Crl.) nos.13284-13289
of 2023 and Criminal Appeal", has observed
that "Constitutional Courts, in the ordinary
course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound
schedule for the disposal of cases pending
before any other Courts. Constitutional Courts
may issue directions for the time-bound
disposal of cases only in exceptional
circumstances. The issue of prioritizing the
disposal of cases should be best left to the
decision of the concerned Courts where the
cases are pending".
8. In the light of aforesaid, this Court
refrain itself from issuing any direction to
the trial court. Accordingly, writ petition
stands dismissed in limine.
9. However, it goes without saying that it
is the bounden duty of the civil court to
make every possible endeavour to decide
the proceedings at the earliest without any
undue delay.
(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.)
18.03.2024
Rajni
