AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner seeks directions for expeditious disposal of interim applications filed in the suit instituted in the year 2025 itself.
Learned counsel for respondents appearing on advance intimation accepts notice and strongly opposes the petition, submitting that the petitioner has concealed that the learned Judicial Officer before whom the suit is pending was ill and therefore on leave. It is further submitted on behalf of respondents that the petitioner has already filed a petition before the Principal District & Sessions Judge for transfer of the suit and that transfer petition, listed today itself has been adjourned to 31.10.2025 because the petitioner did not take steps for issuance of notice to the respondents.
Whatever be the circumstances, there is no reason to prioritize the hearing of applications filed in a suit instituted in the year 2025 itself, when other suits aged more than fifteen years are pending in courts. It is not acceptable that despite being fully aware about the overflowing dockets, the counsel would bring such petition adding to the same. Before filing such petition, counsel for petitioner ought to have examined if it is possible or even fair to seek expeditious disposal directions in such freshly instituted suit, that too when learned Judicial Officer presiding over the trial court had to be on leave on account of illness.
Further, it is the petitioner, who himself lacks diligence and did not take steps for issuance of notice of the Transfer Petition also. No special reason has been explained by learned counsel for petitioner to justify his plea to prioritize the subject suit.
I find the petition completely devoid of merit and frivolous, so the same is dismissed with costs of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with DHCLSC within one week. Pending application also stands disposed of.