PARDEEP KUMAR Vs. BASANT LAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF Pardeep Kumar has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 08.08.2013 (Annexure P -2) passed by the trial court, thereby allegedly dismissing application (Annexure P -1) filed by the plaintiff for examining handwriting expert to prove issue no. 2 dated 25.03.2004. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

(2.) ON pointed inquiry, counsel for the petitioner could not show from order Annexure P -2 that the petitioner's application (Annexure P -1) has been thereby dismissed. On the other hand, perusal of order (Annexure P -2) reveals that the plaintiff was asked to move the said application at a subsequent stage. Reason for the same is that issues in the main suit were framed on 25.03.2004. However, thereafter, defendant no. 4, who had earlier filed written statement, filed a fresh written statement. Regarding the same, issues were framed on 21.04.2009, probably regarding right of defendant no. 4 to file fresh written statement. For the time being, the trial court was dealing with issues framed on 21.04.2009. In view thereof, the trial court appears to have asked the plaintiff -petitioner to move application relating to issues dated 25.03.2004 after decision on issues dated 21.04.2009. However, the application Annexure P -1 has not been adjudicated upon or dismissed by the trial court vide order Annexure P -2. Faced with this situation, counsel for the petitioner referred to order Annexure P -3, which is also dated 08.08.2013. However, even by the said order, application Annexure P -1 has not been dealt with or dismissed by the trial court.

(3.) CONDUCT of the plaintiff -petitioner, mentioned in orders Annexures P -2 and P -3, prima facie is contemptuous and contumacious. He had filed application for transfer of the suit to some other Court before the District Judge, who, however, dismissed the said application. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed application in the trial court itself for transfer of the suit, knowing that the trial court had no power or authority to order transfer of the suit. Not only that, the plaintiff lost his cool and got agitated. He also made a statement that he did not want to proceed with the suit in the said Court.