V. CHANDRA MANIKYAVELU Vs. INDIRA VIVEKNAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The limited prayer of the petitioners is to the effect that they have reached a ripe old age and it is one of the concerns on which the present petition is filed. It is their case that they are land owners whose lands have been acquired for extension of Mahalakshmi Residential Layout under a notification of the year 1977. The amounts awarded as compensation were disputed and were resolved at a Mediation and an agreement was filed in that regard. Thereafter the award amount having been deposited, the petitioners have sought for enhancement of the compensation.

(2.) Insofar as the entitlement is concerned, respondents 1 and 2 have resisted the claim and the matter was referred to the Civil Court which has adjudicated on the matter and has, after a prolonged enquiry, reserved the case for judgment in case No. LAC 83/1987 on 26/3/2013. Thereafter on 7/6/2013, the matter was listed before the court for further hearing. After having heard the parties, the matter was again posted for judgment on 8/7/2013 and thereafter posted on the following dates consecutively: 20/7/2013, 29/7/2013, 5/8/2013, 16/8/2013, 7/9/2013, 12/9/2013, 27/9/2013, 10/10/2013, 21/10/2013, 25/10/2013, 6/11/2013, 19/11/2013, 2/12/2013, 10/12/2013 and to 9/1/2014. As on date, the fate of the matter, is not known. It is in this background that the petitioners are before this court and would pray that there be a direction to the Court below that the judgment be rendered in the lifetime of these petitioners, as they are well past 90 and may not live to see the judgment, if it is delayed any further.

(3.) In this background, it is to be noticed that it is possible that the Court below is hard pressed for time, on account of the pressure of work, in rendering judgment. But it is to be kept in view that the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which should guide the courts in their performance, specifically lays down at Order XX Rule (1), as follows: