IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 22.08.2025 Ram Avtar Aggarwal …Petitioner V/s M/s S.K. Steel Processor Pvt. Ltd. …Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Vikas Bali, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (ORAL)

By way of the instant revision petition, preferred under Article

227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner (Ram Avtar Aggarwal) seeks the issuance of directions to the trial Court for time bound decision in Civil Suit No.1459-2021 titled as M/s S.K. Steel Processors Private Limited Vs.

Ram Avtar & others (Annexure P-1).

2. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.1 (M/s S.K. Steel Processor Pvt. Ltd.) had filed a suit for specific performance (Annexure P-1) accompanied by an application (Annexure P-2) under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short the “CPC”). The petitioner-defendant and others put in appearance in November 2021 and thereafter, the matter remained pending for filing of written statement. The petitioner filed written statement on 18.11.2022 and other defendants also filed their written statement (Annexures P-5 and P-7 respectively).

3. The grievance is that the matter is being adjourned unnecessarily and the application for injunction is not being decided as a result of which the suit is not proceeding.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while referring to the interlocutory orders placed on record, submits that due to the inordinate delay, the land in dispute is stuck up. He prays that directions be issued to the trial Court for expeditious and time bound decision of the suit.

5. Learned counsel submits that, at this stage, he would in fact pray for immediate decision of the application for injunction so that the matter can proceed.

6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. The suit was instituted on 21.10.2021. Notice was issued for 11.11.2021. The petitioner/defendant and other defendants put in appearance on 11.11.2021. The matter then remained pending for filing written statement and written statement on behalf of the petitioner/defendant No.1 was filed on 18.11.2022 whereas, written statement on behalf of defendant No.2 was filed on 02.04.2024.

8. The interlocutory order (Annexure P-8) shows that the matter is consistently being adjourned for consideration on the application for stay. On account of the same, issues have not been framed and trial is not progressing.

9. This Court is conscious of the fact that Courts are overburdened with cases. It is neither possible nor fair to order time bound disposal in all cases. There are old cases, action plan cases and other cases which are to be given priority. At the same time, it is to be kept in mind that valuable rights of parties are involved in all cases and, therefore, Courts are duty bound to make every possible effort to deal with urgent issues expeditiously. Justice, it is said, should not only be done but should also be seen to have been done.

10. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances, the present revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the Court concerned where Civil Suit No.1459-2021 titled as M/s S.K. Steel Processors Private Limited Vs. Ram Avtar & others (Annexure P-1) is pending, to expeditiously decide the application for injunction and then proceed with the suit in accordance with law.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(VIKRAM AGGARWAL)

JUDGE August 22, 2025 vcgarg