JATI SINGH Vs. GRAM SABHA, DALUANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the orders of the Courts below declining the prayer of the plaintiff-petitioner for ad interim injunction. While issuing notice of motion on April 11, 1991, an order of status quo regarding possession was passed. Revision was later on admitted to regular hearing and remained pending for over three and a half years. The interim order as already noticed above remained operative during all this period and is operating even today.

(2.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties I am of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by disposing of the revision on merit and interest of justice would be better served if a direction is issued to the trial Court to decide the main suit within a reasonable time and in the meantime, the interim order as granted by this Court is ordered to continue.

(3.) Having regard to the situation as noticed above, the parties through their counsel have been directed to appear in the trial Court on November 21, 1994 when a date will be fixed for evidence of the plaintiff in the week commencing December 12, 1994 and the second date in the week commencing January 9, 1995. Learned counsel for the petitioner has undertaken before me that the plaintiff would conclude his entire evidence on the two dates to be fixed in the manner stated above and in case he fails to do so, the interim order as granted by this Court may be deemed to have been vacated automatically. In view of the stand taken by the counsel for the petitioner, it is ordered that interim order as granted by this Court on April, 11, 1991 shall continue till the disposal of the suit but in case the plaintiff fails to conclude his evidence on the two dates as indicated above, the said interim order shall be deemed to have been vacated automatically. It is further directed that the trial Court shall dispose of the suit finally within one month of the conclusion of defendant's evidence.