MOHANLAL SHAH Vs. PUKHRAJ CHOUDHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petition in this Court was filed on 7-12-1991 and on 21-1-1992 the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prayed for the record to be sent for the purposes of admission, which request was accepted and thereafter unnecessary adjournments were sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner till the matter came up on 19-11 -1993, on which date the show-cause notice was issued as to why the revision petition be not admitted and allowed, in spite of the fact that the service was complete on 4-4-1993 the requests for adjournment were made from time to time and ultimately it is today i.e. 19-5-1994 that the matter comes up for the purposes of admission before me. It is a matter of concern for this Court that the matter was prolonging from Dec., 1991 to May, 1994 on account of unnecessary adjournments being sought and in the process it is ultimately the litigant who suffers. We have been repeatedly telling the learned Members of the Bar to cooperate and avoid unnecessary adjournments. I believe that in future the learned Members of the Bar avoid unnecessary adjournments and co-operate with the Court so that unnecessary delay is not caused and the litigants do not suffer on that account.

(2.) On the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties that the revision petition may be disposed of finally at this stage I have heard the arguments and the revision petition is being decided finally by this order.

(3.) The petitioner has laid challenge to the order dated 16-5-1991 passed by the learned trial court on the application filed by the petitioner for grant of prohibitory and mandatory injunction and also to the order passed by the learned first appellate court dated 5-9-1991 whereby the order passed by the learned trial court was affirmed.