SURINDER GAUR Vs. V K SABHARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is against the order of the Additional District Judge adjourning the appeal sine die till the respondent's application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is decided.

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the plaintiff filed a suit for separate possession by way of partition of the suit land as per his share. Suit was contested by some of the defendants whereas other defendants were proceeded ex -parte. Vide judgment and decree dated 17.1.1984 a preliminary decree in favour of the plaintiff was passed. One Ishar Dass, retired Naib Tehsildar was appointed as Local Commissioner in order to find out the possession of the respective parties and then settle the share -holders as per preliminary decree. Local Commissioner gave his report on 6.6.1991. Objections were raised and the court finally decided these objections and passed final decree on 11.3.1991. Aggrieved by the preliminary decree as well as the final decree passed by the Court, appeal was filed by the respondents and arguments in the appeal were partly heard and the case was adjourned for remaining arguments. It is during the pendency of the arguments that an application was filed praying that the appeal be adjourned sine die till an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is decided by the Court. The Additional District Judge vide impugned order adjourned the appeal sine die till the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is decided by the lower Court. It is this order of the Additional District Judge which is under challenge.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondents tried to justify the order of the Additional District Judge reiterating the same reasoning which weighed with the Additional District Judge.