AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Satish K. Agnihotri, J.
By this petition, the petitioner challenges the legality and validity of the order dated 09.07.2008 (Annexure P/1) passed by the IInd Civil Judge, Class II, Bilaspur is Civil Suit No. 20-A/2007, whereby and where under the application u/s 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, "CPC") filed by respondents/defendants was allowed and the interim order dated 06.10.2006 (Annexure P/6) passed by IV Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2005, was vacated.
The indisputable facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioner are, that the petitioner filed a civil suit (Annexure P/2) for declaration and permanent injunction to the effect that the disputed Will dated 31.07.1996 be declared as null and void. The application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC for temporary injunction by the petitioner/plaintiff was rejected by the trial Court on 25.04.2005 (Annexure P/5).
Being aggrieved, the petitioner/plaintiff filed appeal being Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 02/2005 before IV Additional District Judge, Bilaspur. The IV Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, while considering all the aspects of the matter, directed not to exclude the disputed Will dated 31.07.1996 till further orders. However, it was clarified in the order that if there is delay caused by the plaintiff, liberty was reserved to the parties to make an application for vacating the stay. Pursuant to the observation made by the IV Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, the respondents/defendants filed an application u/s 151 of the CPC on 17.04.2008. Learned Judge, after hearing both the parties, came to the conclusion that unnecessary delay has been caused in disposal of the matter by the plaintiff, therefore, the order dated 06.10.2006 (Annexure P/6) was ordered to be vacated.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since the order dated 06.10.2006 (Annexure P/6) was passed by the IVth Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, Civil Judge, Class II, Bilaspur, cannot vacate the interim order.
The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is misconceived as IV Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, has granted liberty in the order dated 06.10.2006 (Annexure P/6) to make an application for vacating the stay order, if the plaintiff causes unnecessary delay in disposal of the main case. There is no quarrel on the point that unnecessary delay was caused by the plaintiff in disposal of the petition. The interim order was passed on 06.10.2006 and till date despite several opportunities granted, the petitioner/plaintiff could not examine any witness. Thus, the order dated 09.07.2008 (Annexure P/l) passed by the court below is just, proper and unexceptionable, warranting no interference.
This Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India should refrain itself from interfering with the order passed by the Court below, except in such cases where perversity, illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error is writ large on the face of the record, which is not in the present case.
In view of the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, I.A. No. 1 stands disposed of.