Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/9324/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9324 of 2008
==========================================
VASUBEN
WD/O CHANDUBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL & 8 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
CHUNIBHAI
HARIBHAI GAJERA POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF & 1 - Respondent(s)
==========================================
Appearance
:
MR RM
CHHAYA for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 9.
None for
Respondent(s) : 1 - 2.
==========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 16/07/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. By
way of this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioners have prayed for appropriate writ, direction or
order and to quash and set aside the order dated 31/10/2008 passed by
the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Surat below Exh. 55 in
Regular Civil Suit No. 211/2004 (Annexure-A to the petition) by
which the learned trial Court has rejected the application submitted
by the petitioners to produce certain documents as premature. Though
the reasoning given by the learned trial Court rejecting the
application is not germane, still considering the order passed by the
learned Single Judge dated 06/10/2004 passed in Special Civil
Application No. 6295/2004, by which the learned trial Court was
directed to decide and dispose of Exh. 5 peremptorily on 21/10/2004
or on any other date that may be fixed by the learned trial Court, it
is reported that still Exh. 5 application is not decided and disposed
of. This Court proposes to dispose of present Special Civil
Application with following observation and direction.
2. It
is the contention on behalf of the petitioners that the
respondents-original plaintiffs had produced xerox copies of three
power of attorney, which are forged and original power of attorney
are not coming forth. It will be open for the petitioners to request
the learned trial Court to consider the same and the learned trial
Court shall consider the same even at the stage of considering Exh. 5
application. This Court has not expressed any opinion on merits but
the same has to be considered by the learned trial Court. With this
Special Civil Application is disposed of.
3. Before
parting with the present order, this Court is at pains to note that
inspite of the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this
Court (Coram: K.S. Jhaveri, J.) in Special Civil Application No.
6295/2004, dated 06/10/2004, the learned trial Court has not decided
and disposed of Exh. 5 application even after a period of four years.
4. Under
the circumstances, the Registry is directed to call for explanation
from the learned trial Court as to why the Exh. 5 application is not
decided and disposed of till date. This Court has come across so
many orders passed by the learned trial Court from District Surat
that Exh. 5 application are heard after four to five years.
Considering Order 39 Rule 3-A of the Civil Procedure Code that even
the learned trial Court is suppose to decide and dispose of Exh. 5
application within thirty days where an ex parte injunction has been
granted without giving notice to the opposite party and in other case
as early as possible. It is very unfortunate that even the
proceedings are pending at Exh. 5 stage for more than four to five
years. If such a long time is taken to decide Exh. 5 application, in
that case, the parties will have to suffer as either the equity will
be changed and/or some further complication may arise.
5. Under
the circumstances, the Registry is directed to place this order
before Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice so that appropriate
direction can be issued to the learned trial Court to decide and
dispose of Exh. 5 application as early as possible and in no case
after six months from the date of filing of application Exh. 5. The
Registry is is directed to place this order before Hon’ble the
Acting Chief Justice by 25/07/2008.
With this, the present Special Civil Application is disposed of .
Direct
service is permitted.
(M.R.
SHAH, J.)
siji
Top