Pritam Kaur and Others vs Kishan Chand and Others

S.D. Anand, J.—The facts, averred in the course of the petition and pointedly presented by the learned Counsel before this Court, make fairly unenviable reading. Arguments in part are averred to have been heard by the learned Appellate Authority on 21.11.2009 and the matter was adjourned to 17.12.2009. On that date, the learned Counsel for the party opposite was not feeling well and the matter was adjourned to 29.01.2010. As the learned Presiding Officer was to be on compensatory leave for the period from 27.01.2010 to 29.01.2010, the matter was adjourned to 16.04.20 10. The petitioners herein (landlords of the tenanted premises) filed a plea for pre-ponement on 05.02.2010. Notice thereof was issued to the party opposite for 03.03.2010. On that date, the counsel for the party opposite sought time to file reply thereto and the matter was again adjourned to 18.03.2010. On that date, the learned Counsel for the party opposite sought time to have instructions.

The matter is presently fixed for 01.04.2010.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners states that the interests of justice would be served if a direction for time-bound disposal of the appeal by the learned Appellate Authority is granted by this Court. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the learned Appellate Authority is directed to positively hear the arguments on 01.04.20 10 and dispose of the matter on merits thereof. A copy of the order granted by the Appellate Authority shall be forwarded to this Court. The learned Presiding Officer would be separately called upon to explain the factual averments made in the course of the petition, a copy whereof shall be forwarded to him. On receipt thereof, the matter shall be put up before the undersigned on the administrative side.

Disposed of in limine accordingly.