DELHI JAL BOARD Vs. CHANDGI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 25th July, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, filed by the appellant herein.

(2.) The appellant herein filed a suit seeking a decree of partition, rendition of accounts, injunction and declaration and along with the said appeal the above-mentioned application for interim injunction was also filed. By order dated 24th March, 1998, an ex parte injunction was granted to the appellant on the said application. The application for injunction thereafter was listed from time to time for arguments and lastly came up for hearing on 25th July, 2007. During this period ex parte interim order passed in 1998 continued. On 25th July, 2007 counsel for the appellant sought adjournment on the ground that she had been engaged in February, 2007 and that she was not in a position to argue the matter as she did not have proper instructions. In these circumstances learned Single Judge vacated the interim order. Almost nine years had gone by and for one reason or the other, hearing on the application was being postponed. The contention that was raised for seeking adjournment was that the counsel was not ready for arguments as she was not having proper instructions. We fail to understand when a counsel is engaged, why proper instructions were not given to the counsel. The counsel was engaged in February, 2007 and till 25th July, 2007, if no proper instruction could be given, then it is the appellant who has to suffer for the said lapse. We find no ground to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal has no merit and is dismissed.