V K AGRAWALA Vs. MUNSIF CITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order only highlights the factors which contribute to pendency of cases to the advantage of one party seeking relief before this Court and to the detriment of an opposite party. The entire proceedings of the Court comes to a halt when the Court expects a petitioner to take steps for service within the prescribed time under the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules , and the summons will not be deposited.

(2.) IN the present case after the writ petition was entertained on 10 November, 1987 and the petitioner received an ad interim order, the law required him to take steps to affect service upon the respondents in pursuance of Chapter XII of the Rules. Rule 3 of this Chapter requires a party seeking a notice of motion to take steps within 10 days. The purpose is to let the respondent know as far as possible at an early date that a case has been instituted before the High Court. Once notices have been directed to be issued by the Court, an opposite party is as of right entitled to receive notice within the time prescribed under the Rules. This is in the interest of justice so that the pendency of a case is intimated to the party against whom notice has been issued.

(3.) INASMUCH as a party, a litigant or a lawyer's office may default, the registry also cannot be absolved of the blame if it does not put up the case before the Court for appropriate orders when steps are not taken upon notices being issued by the Court. In the present case the registry is as much to blame as the party which obtained the ad interim order on 11-11-1987. It is difficult for this Court to overlook the lapse on behalf of the concerned section of the registry; it has contributed to the lingering of this case without notice to opposite parties.