SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Asha Menon, J.
Manju Rani - Appellant
Versus
Shiv Property Dealer - Respondent
CM (M) 417 of 2021, CM Appl. 19653 of 2021 (Exemption)
Decided On : 07-07-2021




The court mandated the expeditious disposal of prolonged litigation, emphasizing compliance with prior directives on urgency and the procedural handling regarding deceased respondents.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Petitioner sought early hearing in a long-pending matter initially filed in 1988 - Court reiterated previous orders directing expeditious disposal. (Paras 2-5)

(B) Legal representatives of deceased respondents pending substitution - Notice to unserved respondents noted. (Para 3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner has approached the Court multiple times for urgency in hearing due to delays caused by an ineffective Trial Court handling, despite prior directives for expedited processing.

Findings of Court:
The Trial Court was ordered to hear the case on the next fixed date and resolve it within six months.

Issues: Determining the urgency for hearing due to the long delay and the status of legal representatives of the deceased respondents.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court underscored the necessity for the Trial Court to adhere to directives ensuring timely resolutions in light of previous orders.

Result: Petition disposed of with directions.

Table of Content
1. delay in handling case; urgency. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court's directive for expeditious trial. (Para 4 , 5)
3. petition disposed with directions. (Para 6)

ORDER

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

Asha Menon, J. (Oral)

CM APPL.19653/2021 (Exemption)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application stand disposed of.

CM (M) 417/2021

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the learned Trial Court dated 5th June, 2021 in Civil Suit No. 95251/2016 thereby declining to treat the matter as urgent for early listing.

2. Ms. Komal Chhibber, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had approached this Court twice before as litigation in this case had commenced in the year 1988 and the matter was not being taken up for hearing by the Trial Court and vide two orders dated 11th October, 2019 and 3rd March, 2021, this Court had directed the learned Trial Court to dispose of the matter expeditiously. Yet, it is submitted by learned counsel, the learned Trial Court has dismissed the application moved by the petitioner for early hearing of the matter as en-bloc dates were being given in not so urgent matters.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner informs that both the respondents have expired and applications for substitution of their legal representatives are pending disposal and the legal representatives are yet to be substituted. It is also informed that the notices to the legal representatives of the deceased respondents have remained unserved.

4. In these circumstances, the learned Trial Court is directed to take up the case for hearing on the date already fixed, i.e., 16th August, 2021 and proceed with the trial in accordance with law, keeping in mind the two orders of this Court directing the learned Trial Court to dispose of the matter expeditiously.

5. This Court once again directs the learned Trial Court that all endeavour be made to dispose of this case, not later than six months from the date of this order.

6. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.

7. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top