The court has the discretion to grant or refuse an adjournment under Order 17 Rule 1 CPC, but it should consider the facts and circumstances of each case and should not dismiss an application for adjournment without giving the party an opportunity to be heard.

ORDER

The present miscellaneous petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, filed by the unsuccessful petitioner/plaintiff feeling aggrieved by order dated 15.02.2024 in RCS A No.1A/2013 on the file of the Court of learned IInd Additional District Judge, Nawgaon, District- Chhatarpur (M.P.).

2. The facts that lead to filing of this petition by the petitioner/plaintiff in brief are as follows :

The petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit RSC A No.1A/2013 on the file IInd Additional District Judge, Nawgaon, District- Chhatarpur for relief of declaration declaring the sale-deed dated 04.12.2009 set to have been executed by her in favour of respondent no.1 and 2 is null and void and seek for permanent injunction. The defendant entered appearance and filed their written statement and the trial Court framed the appropriate issues and commenced the trial. The petitioner/plaintiff examined as PW-1 and one more witness examined on his behalf. When the matter came up for further evidence and filed an application under Order 17 Rule 1 CPC seeks adjournment on the ground of some important function in the family of advocate but the learned Trial Court without considering the facts dismissed the same and aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned trial Court, filed this present petition seeking to set-aside the order dated 15.02.2024.

3. The issue for consideration is “whether the trial Court erred in dismissing the application under Order 17 Rule 1 CPC ” ?.

4. To the extent relevant to decide the issues the facts are as under:-

The learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff stated that the petitioner herein and one more witness examined as PW-1 and PW-2 and when the matter came up for further evidence, the petitioner filed an application under Order 17 Rule 1 CPC for seeking adjournment for adducing further evidence but the learned trial Court without considering the facts mentioned in the petition dismissed the petition without giving an opportunity to adduce further evidence and, therefore, challenge the order of the learned trial Court.

5. On perusal of the order of the learned trial Court dated 15.02.2024 para-2 read as under:

“The plaintiff filed an application under Order 17 Rule 1 CPC under this the plaintiff has expressed his inability to adduce evidence having a function in the family of the plaintiff’s advocate and requested to adjourn the matter and the learned trial court further observed that it is clear from the observation of the Hon’ble High Court in M.P.3068/2022 on the basis of the order dated 14.07.2023 this case has been taken up for hearing again, in this case, issues were framed on 28.10.2023 and the case was fixed for evidence on 06.11.2023 in which the plaintiff has been given opportunity for evidence on 06.11.2023, 06.12.2023, 07.12.2023, 18.01.2024 and 06.02.2024. Thus the plaintiff has been provided ample opportunity to adduce the evidence but the plaintiff has not completed his evidence, therefore, the reasons mentioned in the petition cannot be considered as the circumstances beyond the control of the plaintiff, therefore, the application filed by the plaintiff’s petitioner is rejected”.

6. Perusal of above order is clearly shows that the trial Court has given ample opportunity to the petitioner/plaintiff to adduce further evidence but the petitioner/plaintiff has not abide the same. The counsel for the petitioner suppressed about the earlier order passed by this Court in the above M.P. No.3068/2022 and also suppressed giving an opportunity for above adjournments. Counsel for the petitioner stated without giving an opportunity, the application filed by petitioner was rejected. The petitioner/plaintiff came to the Court with unclean hands by suppressing the material facts. However, PW-1 and 2 were examined and now this matter came up for further evidence and it is appropriate to give direction to the petitioner to file an application before the learned trial Court seeking to re