TRILOK NATH PAHUJA Vs. BHADRA DEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record. The only prayer of the petitioners is that District Judge, Bareilly may be directed to decide SCC Revision No. 48 of 2004, Trilok Nath Pahuja and others v. Bhadra Deo and another expeditiously as early as possible within a stipulated time fixed by this Court. According to the petitioners, several dates have been fixed in the aforesaid case before the Court below and the respondents are not taking interest to get the said case decided and that they are trying to linger on the matter, hence the instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the aforesaid prayer.

(2.) If a party is frequently taking dates after dates to delay dispensation of justice there has to be a limit to such tactics adopted by a party. The Courts are not expected to be a party to such tactics by. readily giving adjournments in cases just for the asking. The J.S.C.C. suits are required to be decided within six months as provided in the Small Causes Courts Act, 1887 and within three months by the Prescribed Authority appointed under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972). Frequent dates should not be given. The Courts have a responsibility to decide the case within the time which has been fixed by the legislation in its wisdom and they have to strive to decide the cases in the time limit so fixed. If they do not do so, it sets a bad precedent opening the Pandora's box for public criticism. Delay erodes the faith of the public in justice of system, hence care should be taken in this regard by the Courts.

(3.) Rule 15(3) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Rules, 1972 provides that release application may be decided within a period of two months from the date of its presentation.