Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT NAGPUR
V.M. DESHPANDE, J.
M/s. Butibori CEPT Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. & Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 536 of 2021
Decided On : 04-02-2021
Adjournment - Special Civil Suit - Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 - 25.1.2021 - Exhibit 5, Exhibit 54 - The court discussed the urgency of the matter, the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the importance of prioritizing health over hasty decisions. The order granting only one day adjournment was quashed and set aside, and the parties were directed to appear before the lower court on 4.3.2021.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought an adjournment in a Special Civil Suit due to the senior counsel's Covid-19 diagnosis and subsequent hospitalization. The lower court granted only a one-day adjournment, prompting the petitioner to approach the higher court through a writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the lower court should have shown more sensitivity towards the senior counsel's health condition and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. It emphasized the importance of prioritizing health over hasty decisions and quashed the order granting only a one-day adjournment.
Issues: The main issue was the appropriateness of the lower court's decision to grant only a one-day adjournment in light of the senior counsel's Covid-19 diagnosis and the pandemic's impact.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the urgency of the matter, the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the importance of prioritizing health over hasty decisions.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the order granting only a one-day adjournment was quashed and set aside, and the parties were directed to appear before the lower court on 4.3.2021.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel Shri A.M.Ghare for the petitioner and learned counsel Shri Nitin Lalwani, who submitted that he has instructions to appear on behalf of respondent No.1 and he has already filed his Vakalatnama and he does not wish to file any reply to the writ petition. The statement is accepted. Also, heard Advocate Shri Ranjeet Singh Gehlot h/f learned counsel Shri A.C.Jaltare for respondent No.2 and learned counsel Shri R.M.Bhangde for respondent No.3. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for parties.
2. At the outset, learned counsel Shri A.M.Ghare for the petitioner submitted that he is not pressing prayer clause (d) of the writ petition at this stage and will file appropriate application, if so advised.
3. Respondent No.1 filed special civil suit for declaration, injunction, and recovery of money against the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 and 3. The said suit was registered as Special Civil Suit No.487/2019. Along with plaint, respondent No.1 also filed an application for interim relief under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2. The said application is at Exhibit 5 and is pending on the file of learned Judge of Court below from April 2019.
4. The suit as well as the application for injunction is contested by the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 and 3 by filing their respective replies and written statements.
5. Be that as it may, the suit was fixed on 25.1.2021 for hearing on application for injunction. On the said day, an application for adjournment was moved by learned counsel for the petitioner (defendant No.2) before the Court below. The said application is at Exhibit-54. In the application, it was stated that Advocate Shri S.C.Mehadia for the petitioner (defendant No.2) is tested Covid-19 positive and he, being aged about 74 years and a senior citizen, was admitted as an indoor patient in Kings Way Hospital. It was also stated in the application that as per medical advice, Advocate Shri Mehadia was required hospitalization and after his discharge, he was asked to remain home quarantine and, therefore, in the application it was stated that the matter be posted after a period of three weeks. Surprisingly, the application was opposed on behalf of original plaintiff taking a plea that defendant No.2 can file written notes of argument below Exhibit- 5 within 4-5 days and the matter can be processed expeditiously because Exhibit-5 was argued by the plaintiff on earlier occasion. On the very same day, learned Judge below passed order which is reproduced herein below:
Perused the application and say. The matter is of urgent nature. In view of say filed the written arguments can be filed. Moreover, the def no.1 & def no.3 have filed amendment application. Hence, granted for today.”
Thus, adjournment only for one day was granted.
Being aggrieved by the said, the petitioner approached to this Court.
6. On 27.1.2021, this writ petition came up for its admission before this Court and after issuing Notices of final disposal, stay was granted staying further progress of Special Civil Suit No.487/2019 pending on the file of learned 17th Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur.
7. Today, when this writ petition was called out, learned counsel Shri Nitin Lalwani for respondent No.1 fairly stated that he is not supporting the order passed by learned Judge below Exhibit-55 in Special Civil Suit No.487/2019. He submitted that order be quashed and the suit be posted for hearing on Exhibit 5 as per convenience of counsel for the petitioner (defendant No.2).
8. The application for injunction was pending from year 2019. It was not decided till order below Exhibit 54 was passed and hearing of plaintiff was complete. In the application for adjournment reason was disclosed as to why petitioner (defendant No.2) is seeking adjournment. The reason was that Advocate Shri S.C.Mehadia for defendant No.2, who is senior member of the Bar, was tested Covid-19 positive. Not only that, he was admitted as
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
