S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.

21392/2013

(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
JAIPUR

ORDER
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.21392/2013
Mandir Shri Ladli Ji, Ramganj Bazaar, Jaipur & Anr.
Vs.
Additional Civil Judge (JD) No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan & Ors.
Date of Order :

16.12.2013

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

Mr. Ankit Sharma, for the petitioners.
BY THE COURT
The prayer made in this petition is that the trial court
be directed to expeditiously dispose of the suit for permanent
injunction filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs (hereinafter 'the
plaintiffs') in the year 2006. Counsel for the plaintiffs has
submitted that the suit for permanent injunction was filed on
23.08.2006, issues thereon were framed on 11.03.2010 and
Sanjay Goswami (PW-1) examined on 10.01.2011. He submits
that thereafter the progress in the suit has been tardy and
adjournments are sought and granted for the mere asking. He
submits that the delayed trial entails harassment to the plaintiffs
without just cause.
Heard the counsel for the plaintiffs and perused the
order-sheets of the trial court for the period 2006 to 2013.
It

is

no

doubt

true

that

the

trial

court

are

overburdened with heavy dockets and sometime even lack of

essential

infrastructure.

Yet

it

cannot

be

gainsaid

that

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.21392/2013

(2)

adjournments ought not to be granted for the mere asking.

Delayed trial without just cause entails loss of public faith in the
administration of justice. Potentially this can entail people
resorting to extra legal means for the settlement of their dispute.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the context of the adjournments
in civil suits has held that ordinarily not more than three/four
adjournments should be granted in the life of a civil suit.
Reference in this regard can be had to the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Shiv Cotex Versus

Tirgun Auto Plat P. Ltd. & Others [2011 AIR SCW 5789].
The emphasis is thus on firm on adjournments which should not
be granted without good reasons recorded.
Consequently, I would dispose of this petition with a
direction to the trial court to dispose of the suit No.41/2012 (old
No.171/2006) pending before it as expeditiously as possible
keeping in mind its docket and the age of the other suit pending
before it.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

MS/-

(ALOK SHARMA), J

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.Manoj Solanki, Jr. P.A.