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
3 paragraphs · 183 wordsD.N. Patel, J.—Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner is not pressing this writ petition, but, it is fairly submitted that after succeeding in Title Suit No. 22 of 2006, an execution case was also preferred as the suit was for specific performance. By the order of the court, sale deed has been executed on 5th July, 2007 and after the sale deed is executed, the original Defendants have preferred Miscellaneous Case No. 9 of 2008 for setting aside the exparte decree dated 14th August, 2006 and, therefore, let a suitable direction be given to dispose of the Miscellaneous Case No. 9 of 2008, within stipulated time.
In view of the aforesaid submission and looking to the long drawn litigation between the parties, I hereby direct the Sub Judge, Hazaribagh to hear and finally dispose of the Miscellaneous Case No. 9 of 2008, as expeditiously as possible and practicable, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of, in view of the aforesaid direction and observation.