Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Rajender Kumar Sethi - Appellant
Versus
V.G. Marketing Pvt. Ltd. - Respondent
CM (M) 321 of 2022 & CM Appl. 17160 of 2022
Decided On : 06-04-2022
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Judicial Management
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The appellant sought directions for expeditious trial of a civil suit that had been pending with several scheduled hearings between November 2020 and April 2022.
Findings of Court:
The learned Judge expressed confusion over the desire for expedited handling, highlighting the realities of the trial system's burdens post-pandemic.
Issues: The central issue pertained to the appropriateness of seeking a higher court's direction to expedite a trial already under progress.
Ratio Decidendi: The court elucidated that Article 227 cannot be exploited to hasten trial court proceedings unduly, especially in light of the courts' heavy caseloads.
Result: Petition dismissed with costs of Rs.11,000/-.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. request for expeditious trial court proceedings. (Para 1) |
| 2. background of trial court listings and delays. (Para 2) |
| 3. court's disapproval of misuse of judicial process. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 4. dismissal of petition with costs. (Para 6) |
ORDER(Oral)
1. Ms. Simran Sadyara, learned Counsel for the petitioners, seeks a direction to the learned trial court to decide CS 1612/2020 expeditiously.
2. It is seen from the order sheets before the learned Civil Judge that the learned Civil Judge has taken up this matter on 19th November, 2020, 9th December, 2020, 14th January, 2021, 30th March, 2021, 7th September, 2021, 29th September, 2021, 18th November, 2021 and 31st January, 2022 and that the matter is now listed on 25th April, 2022.
3. This Court is completely befuddled as to how the petitioners can even envisage any direction to the learned trial court to deal with this matter with greater expedition than has been displaced by the learned trial court in this case.
4. Post resumption of normal court work after pandemic, trial courts are overburdened and this Court is hesitant to subject them to any greater burden than is already on them.
5. This petition, in my view, is an abuse of process of the court. It is a means to try and use the High Court as an avenue to pressurise the trial court in dealing with the petitioners' matter.
6. This is not what Article 227 of the Constitution of India is meant for. The petition is accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs.11,000/- to be paid by way of a crossed cheque favouring the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee (DHCLSC), to be deposited with the Registrar General of this Court within a period of 10 days from today.
