AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 264 wordsTejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.
CM No. 6788-CII of 2012:
This is an application u/s 151 CPC for placing on record the zimni orders as mentioned in the application itself. Application is allowed as prayed for. CM disposed of.
CR No. 1382 of 2012:
The present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner, who is defendant No. 2 in the suit for permanent injunction, seeking directions to the trial Court for deciding the stay application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC.
Learned counsel submits that the application is pending disposal since January, 2009. Learned counsel refers to the zimni orders which are mentioned in CM No. 6788-CII of 2012 to contend that the matter has been adjourned on number of occasions. Such application had been filed by the plaintiff-Krishan Lal under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC in which status-quo had been ordered to be maintained on 19.01.2009. Thereafter, Krishan Lal-plaintiff had suffered a statement that he does not wish to proceed the present suit and the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by Hari Chand was allowed on 07.04.2010.
In the light of the limited plea raised in the present revision petition and on account of fact that such application is pending adjudication since January, 2009, it would be in the interest of justice to direct the trial Court to decide the application expeditiously and in any case not later than three months from the date of passing of this order. Petition is disposed of accordingly.