ASMAT KHAN GAFAR KHAN Vs. MADINA MASJID TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Amira Razaq, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) These revision applications challenge the order below exhibit D-15 in Regular Civil Suit No. 28/2019/D by which the petitioner's application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC came to be dismissed by the learned Trial Judge.

(3.) Ms. Razaq submits that the impugned order is purported to have been made on 27/5/2019. However, in reality, the said order was never made on the said date. She points out that the record bears out this position and the record comprises inter alia, a report called by this Court itself. She submits that from the report it is clear that at least up to 29/5/2019 no order dtd. 27/5/2019 was uploaded on the official website. She submits that this revision had to be filed on an urgent basis even without a copy of the order, which in any case was not uploaded because the learned trial Judge had placed the matter for hearing the application on the injunction on 30/5/2019. She submits that as result, the petitioner was deprived of an effective opportunity to challenge the impugned order. She submits that it is only because the records and proceedings were called by this Court, the injunction application could not be heard and the suit could not proceed further. She relies on Balalji Baliram Mupade and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors., to submit that no Court should pronounce orders unless the orders were, in fact, ready and reasons could be supplied to the affected party.