VIVEK Vs. KIRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 5.7.2005 below Exh.16-A in Special Civil Suit No.368/2004.

(2.) The petitioner is the original plaintiff who filed a civil suit bearing Special Civil Suit No.368/2004 in the Court of IInd Jt. Civil Judge (S.D.) , Nagpur for possession of the suit property. Respondent Smt. Kiran also had filed a suit bearing Special Civil Suit No.280/2002 for declaration and specific performance of contract. After issuance of suit summons in Special Civil Suit No.368/2004, the respondent/defendant who was served on 18.6.2004 filed an application under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for stay of the suit which was decided on 29.10.2004. A writ petition was then preferred in this Court against that order. The defendant made an application (Exh.9) in the suit on 17.8.2004 for grant of four weeks' time to file written statement. That application was granted by the Trial Court by way of last chance. Thereafter, the respondent again filed applications Exh.10, 14, 15 and 16 which remained pending without any order thereon. As such by order dated 6.1.2005, the Trial Court rejected all these applications including Exh.16. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application (Exh.16-A) for taking written statement on record on 10.1.2005 which was strongly opposed by the petitioner. This application (Exh.16-A) was allowed by the Trial Court by the impugned order dated 5.7.2005. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) This writ petition was called out for final hearing on 25.7.2007. Petitioner in person was heard and Counsel for the respondent remained absent. The case was closed for orders. At 4:30 p.m., Advocate Shri Agrawal on the same day i.e. on 25.7.2007 mentioned that Counsel for respondent Mr. V.V. Bhangade was not feeling well and, therefore, went home. On the next day i.e. on 26.7.2007, Advocate Shri Bhangade appeared and only tendered xerox copy of judgment reported in 1986 Mh.L.J. 525 (Western Coalfields Ltd. through General Manager (Planning), Nagpur...Versus..Rajkumar Kanhiyalal Bhiwapurkar and others) but did not argue the petition and requested to consider the said decision. Hence, this Court closed the case for orders.