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
8 paragraphs · 203 wordsManoj Jain, J
Petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of his suit, filed in the year 2016.
It is a settled position of law that the Constitutional Courts, unless there exists any exceptional reason, do not, generally, give any direction for expeditious disposal of any such matter.
The learned counsel for petitioner submits that the suit in question had earlier reached the stage of final arguments but later on, the defendant has been permitted to file amended written statement and, thereafter, there is no requisite progress in the matter.
The case is stated to be at the stage of plaintiff’s evidence after the additional issues had been framed on 16.12.2024 by the learned Trial Court.
Be that as it may, since no exceptional reason or hardship has been cited, this Court would refrain itself from passing any direction in this regard.
However, it is always open to the petitioner to make appropriate request in this regard before the learned Trial Court and as and when any such request is made, the learned Trial Court would consider the same appropriately, in accordance with law, while also considering its own board-position.
The petition, along with pending application, stands disposed of.