HARI RAM Vs. RATANLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Arguments were heard on the application dated 27-7-1979, filed on behalf of the respondent Ratanlal.

(2.) The contention of the respondent is that he had filed caveat on 23-7-1979. The writ petition was filed on 25-7-1979, and listed for admission on 26-7-1979 and was as shown in the cause-list. The names of Sarvashri D.C. Sharma and N.K. Jain, Advocates for the respondent No. 1 'were not shown in the cause-list. The writ petition was heard and admitted for hearing. On hearing the stay petition, the operation of the impugned order Ex. 22 was stayed for a period of two weeks.

(3.) Shri Calla appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that, though, caveat had been filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1, yet if the writ petition has been heard and admitted for hearing there is no reason why the order of admission dated 26-7-1979 should be recalled. He further contends that the stay order issued on 26-7-1979 also should not be recalled for the same reasons. He has further contended that the respondent No. 1 Ratanlal was present in the Court when the writ petition was being heard and orders for stay were passed. He further contended that Ratan Lal tried to overreach the process of the Court.