AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
W. Diengdoh, J
Ms. D. Khongwir, learned for the petitioner has once again sought for accommodation in this matter as the conducting Sr. counsel, Mr. T.T. Diengdoh, is indisposed on grounds of personal difficulty.
Mr. S. Sen, learned counsel for the respondent, though not objecting to the prayer made, has pointed out that the matter involved here involves execution proceedings pending before the Trial Court. The learned counsel would also submit that there is a direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as far as disposal of execution proceedings are concerned, where the timeline has been fixed at 6(six) months from the date of initiation of the same. In this regard, this High Court has also issued relevant notification bringing the same to the notice of the Trial Courts within this High Court.
This being the case, though there is no interim order passed in this instant petition, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the proceedings before the Trial Court should not be stalled in view of these proceedings before this Court.
Needless to say, it is expected that the case before the Trial Court should proceed in accordance with law and procedure in the absence of any direct order or suitable direction by a superior court including this Court. Therefore, under such circumstances, the Trial Court is at liberty to take its own course of action.
In view of the prayer made, this matter is accordingly adjourned for the day.
As prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, list this matter on 15.05.2025.