High CourtsSingle Bench(2016) 05 JH CK 0189

Captain Deep Srivastava vs Tata Steel Limited

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 17 May 2016 · Citation: (2016) 2 AIRJharR 858

HON’BLE JUDGES
Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
W.P. (C) No. 292 of 2016

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 345 words

Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

In view of the order proposed to be passed hereinafter, it is not necessary to get into the merits of the challenge to the impugned order passed by the learned Appellate Court of District Judge-VI, Jamshedpur in Eviction Appeal No. 08 of 2013 dated 22.12.2015.

3.

Petitioner was the defendant in the Title(Eviction) Suit No. 55 of 2006, who being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 18.3.2013 passed by the Additional Civil Judge(Jr. Division) VI, Jamshedpur has preferred the eviction appeal before the learned Appellate Court. The learned Appellate Court did not find merit in his prayer for stay of execution case being pursued by the plaintiff/ respondent herein vide impugned order dated 22.12.2015.

4.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits on instruction that petitioner is not cooperating in the disposal of the Eviction Appeal instituted in 2013 itself and steps for delivery of possession are being resisted at this stage. The appellant/ petitioner may be directed to cooperate in the proceedings before the Appellate Court and the appeal itself may be directed to be decided within a stipulated period.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till then petitioner may be protected from eviction.

6.

Having regard to the aforesaid submission, it is deemed appropriate to direct learned District Judge-VI, Jamshedpur to consider and decide the Eviction Appeal No. 8 of 2013 within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Petitioner as well as Respondent would not take unnecessary adjournment. Till the period of 6 weeks, as directed herein above, petitioner be not evicted from the quarter in question. Needless to say that if the appeal is not decided within the aforesaid period due to latches on the part of the petitioner, it would be open to the respondent to take steps for his eviction in accordance with law.

7.

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Let the order be communicated to the Court below through FAX at the cost of the respondent.