D.M. COLLEGE MANAGING COMMITTEE, MOGA v. ARYA PRETINIDHI SABHA PUNJAB (REGD.) & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In view of the above, this revision petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. XXXIX rr. 1, 2; s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 99. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. August 06, 2024 (RITU TAGORE) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No PRERNA JOSHI 2024.08.06 22:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment
Mr. Dhirinder Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2. RITU TAGORE, J. (ORAL)
This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for issuance of directions to the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Moga, to decide application dated 18.05.2022 (Annexure P-3) under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC for grant of interim injunction filed by the petitioner in CS-747-2022 titled as D.M. College Managing Committee, Moga Versus Arya Pretinidhi Sabha Punjab (Regd.) and others.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that an application under Order 1 Rule 10 (2) read with Section 151 CPC filed in CS-747-2022 is also lying pending before the learned trial Court and prays that the said application be also ordered to be decided expeditiously. To support his contention, learned counsel referred to the zimini orders (Annexure P-4 Colly.). PRERNA JOSHI 2024.08.06 22:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 and submits that he has no objection if the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance, have gone through the paper-book.
Perusal of the paper-book shows that the proceedings are going on in the present suit. Therefore, at this stage, no directions are required to be given to the learned trial Court to decide the applications in a time bound manner. However, this Court is sanguine that learned trial Court shall make sincere endeavour to dispose of these applications expeditiously.
It is to be noted that concept of right to speedy trial focuses on expeditious case resolution to enhance the efficacy and credibility of judiciary.
Needless to mention, parties to the suit shall assist the Court in expeditious disposal of the case.
Operative part
In view of the above, this revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. August 06, 2024 (RITU TAGORE) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No PRERNA JOSHI 2024.08.06 22:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above, this revision petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. XXXIX rr. 1, 2; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 06 Aug 2024. The bench was RITU TAGORE, ADDITIONAL CIVIL.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.