BALLAM TRIFLA SINGH Vs. GYAN PRAKASH SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 4/4/2025, I have heard submissions of Mr. Ranjit Thorat, learned Senior Advocate i/b Ms. Pratibha Shelke, learned Advocate on behalf of the Applicant and Mr. Anand A. Pande, learned Advocate appearing for the Respondent No.1. The submission of both the learned Advocate were heard completely on 4/4/2025.

(2.) The impugned orders in this Civil Revision Application are arising out of the Obstructionist proceedings. The Applicant ' Obstructionist is the son of the Defendant No.3 i.e. Judgment Debtor. Both the Courts recorded the concurrent findings that the Applicant has produced manipulated and fabricated documents. Therefore, after hearing both the parties this Court expressed that apart from dismissal of Civil Revision Application with exemplary cost, drastic orders are required to be passed and therefore Mr. Ranjit Thorat, learned Senior Advocate took time to take instructions of withdrawal of the Civil Revision Application. Accordingly, on 4/4/2025, time was granted for taking instructions regarding withdrawal of the Civil Revision Application and the matter was adjourned to 8/4/2025. On 8/4/2025, Ms. Pratibha Shelke, learned Advocate on record appeared for the Applicant and informed this Court that Applicant has given instructions not to withdraw the Civil Revision Application and therefore requested the Court to pass the order. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Application was adjourned on 8/4/2025 to 9/4/2025 i.e. today for passing order.

(3.) In the above background, when the matter is called out today, initially Ms. Bhagyesha Kurane, learned Advocate appeared and informed that Mr. Vijay Kurle, learned Advocate has instructions to file vakalatnama and Applicant has obtained NOC from Ms. Pratibha Shelke, learned Advocate on record and request was made to adjourn the matter as Mr. Vijay Kurle, learned Advocate will be arguing the matter. At that time, this Court informed Ms. Bhagyesha Kurane, learned Advocate that the matter is already completely heard and the same is kept today for passing order and therefore there is no question of adjourning the matter. At that stage Mr. Vijay Kurle, learned Advocate appeared and he made the same request that the matter be adjourned as in the meanwhile he will file vakalatnama and thereafter he will argue the matter. It is made very clear to Mr. Vija Kurle, learned Advocate that the submissions of both the parties were heard on 4/4/2025 and the Civil Revision Application is kept today for passing order and therefore there is no question of adjouring the matter.