JAWAHAR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. DEEPAK AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein challenges the order passed by the learned Court on 13.3.2012, closing the evidence of the defendants holding that number of opportunities have been granted to them but there was no compliance on the part of the defendants.

(2.) This order has been challenged before this Court on a number of grounds which do not require adjudication. Even the plea for substantive justice is required to be considered in the factual matrix as presented before the learned trial Court. Repeated adjournments are crowding the docket of the learned trial Courts leaving them little or no opportunity to do effective work. It is not as if adjournments cannot be granted, but then the litigants and counsel conducting the case have to show some sense of responsibility to the limited time resources of the Court. I need not refer to the decision in Thakur Sukhpal Singh Vs. Thakur Kalyan Singh and another, AIR 1963 SC 146 that it is the discretion of the Court to allow an adjournment and such discretion ordinarily is not justiciable. Of-course, if the circumstances are compelling, adjournment can be granted, but seeking such adjournment as a matter of right and course is something which is not permitted by law. I do not find any illegality in the orders as I do realise in the facts that by allowing this petition I will be putting the clock back from the stage of the arguments of the case to the stage where the learned Court will have to go through the same process of the proceedings i.e. recording evidence of the defendants, evidence in rebuttal and then arguments. However, without delving into this aspect of the case any further, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner herein shall pay Rs. 15,000.00 as costs to the plaintiff respondents on the first date when the parties so appear before the learned Court below which date is fixed as 30th July, 2012. Non-compliance of this order shall result in dismissal of the petition without reference to Court and reviving the order as challenged in this petition.