RUPESH KUMAR JAIN Vs. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made a very short prayer that the trial Court may be directed to decide the suit as early as possible as the same has been pending in the Court Since 2006.

(2.) LEARNED counsel took me through the order sheets recorded by the trial Court and canvassed that the evidence of plaintiff was closed on 22nd May, 2010 and thereafter the case has been pending for recording the evidence of respondents -defendants. The defendants did not appear nor tendered any evidence on 8th July and 24th July, 2010. The defendant -respondent filed an affidavit on 10th August, 2010 and was subjected to cross -examination by the learned counsel for the petitioner -plaintiff on 15th March, 2011. His cross -examination could not be completed on that day and the case was adjourned numerous time and finally to 2nd April, 2011, but in between, the defendant did not appear in the Court and every time the adjournment was being sought by the learned counsel for the respondents -defendants. The defendant for one or the other reason has been procrastinating the trial of the suit, hence in the interest of justice the trial Court may be directed to expedite the proceedings and conclude the trial of the suit as early as possible.

(3.) HAVING reflected over the submissions made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff -petitioner and carefully scanned the order -sheets recorded by the trial Court, it is noticed that the trial Court has been very liberal in granting adjournments for recording the evidence of the defendants.