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
5 paragraphs · 309 wordsHeard Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioners.
This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 18.07.2018 passed by the learned Sub Judge-VI, Patna City in Misc. Case No.8 of 2017 whereby further proceeding of Execution Case No.1 of 2016 arising out of Title Suit No.146 of 2004 has been stayed till final disposal of Misc. Case No.8 of 2017.
Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted instead of pressing the application on merit, he is invoking supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for a direction to the court below to dispose of the Misc. Case No.8 of 2017 expeditiously. He contended that only on account of a frivolous application filed by the respondent no.3, the execution proceeding of Execution Case No. 1 of 2016 has been stayed vide order dated 18.07.2018 till disposal of Misc. Case No.8 of 2017 and it is not known as to when the miscellaneous case would be finally decided.
Regard being had to the submissions made above and in view of the nature of the order, which I am going to pass, I do not think it expedient in the interest of justice to issue notice to the respondents as the order is not going to prejudice any of the parties to the proceeding. The learned Sub Judge-VI, before whom the Execution Case No.1 of 2016 is pending, is directed to dispose of the Misc. Case No.8 of 2017 on merits filed under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure as early as possible, preferably within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.
With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed of.
