SHIV DAYAL Vs. ATUL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No. 2 in person. Court guardian of defendant No. 3 also present in person. The learned Counsel for plaintiff moved an application wherein it is stated that after the transfer of this case that court guardian of the plaintiff has not contacted him. Keeping in view of the minority of plaintiff a more chance very kindly be granted to plaintiff to adduce his evidence. Keeping in view the facts that the plaintiff is more prayer considered and allowed subject to cost of Rs. 250/ -. The learned Counsel for the defendant No. 1 refused to accept the cost. Now to come up for plaintiffs evidence on 12.10.2004. Sd/ - Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Indora, Indora, Distt. Kangra (H.P.)."

(2.) It appears that minor plaintiff, respondent therein filed a suit for declaration that the sale made by his father respondent No. 2 in favour of Shiv Dayal, petitioner, herein was bad being without legal necessity, unauthorized and without consideration. This suit was filed in January, 1999. The minor was represented by his uncle Vijay Singh. After the settlement of the issues, the case was listed for evidence of the plaintiff on 8.1.2003. The case was adjourned for the evidence of the plaintiff from time to time but the plaintiffs evidence was never present in spite of imposition of costs on 7th May, 2903 and 25th August, 2003. The case was transferred to the present court on 17th March, 2004 and was listed for the evidence of the plaintiff on 5.10.2004 when the impugned order was passed by the learned trial Judge.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that under the provisions of Order 17 Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure no adjournment can be granted more than three times to a party during the hearing -of the1 suit and in the present case several opportunities were granted to the plaintiff yet the evidence was not produced, and, therefore, granting further adjournment amounts to abuse of the process of the Court, more so, when the suit is collusive as the sale has been challenged by the vendor himself in the name of his minor son.