Skip to content


Natverlal Jethalal Patel Vs. Kalyansing Bhikhabhai Chauhan and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtGujarat High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Revn. Appln. No. 180 of 1977
Judge
Reported inAIR1980Guj160; (1979)GLR961
ActsCode of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 17, Rule 1 - Order 41, Rule 5
AppellantNatverlal Jethalal Patel
RespondentKalyansing Bhikhabhai Chauhan and anr.
Appellant Advocate S.N. Shelat, Adv.
Respondent Advocate Deepak K. Trivedi, Adv.
Excerpt:
- .....have been decided by the learned district judge. in such a case this civil revision application would have become in fructuous. therefore, in order that administration of justice may be toned up in the state of gujarat and may not progressively become sluggish, all civil courts in the state are directed to bear in mind that unless the suit pending on their file has been stayed either by the district court or by the high court, they shall proceed with the hearing of the suit and shall not allow it to lie in cold storage merely because some interlocutory proceeding is pending before the district court or in the high court. all the civil courts shall act upon this direction.4. xxx xxx x xx xxx 5. revision allowed.
Judgment:
ORDER

1-2. *** *** ***

3. It is distressing to note that the present suit which was filed in 1974, has not been decided by the learned trial Judge even though five years have passed since then. It appears to me that the suit has been pending not because the learned trial Judge did not have time to decide it earlier and not because further proceedings have been stayed but because of an unwholesome and unhealthy tendency which appears to have developed in Civil Court in the State that once interlocutory orders are challenged in the District Court or in the High Court, irrespective of whether further proceedings have been stayed or not, the suit does not proceed. I see no reason why during the pendency of an appeal or a Civil Revision Application filed against an order granting an interim injection or refusing to grant it, the suit cannot proceed unless it has been stayed by this Court or by the District Court. It is, therefore, necessary to remind all Civil Courts in the State that mere pendency of interlocutory proceedings either in the District Court or in the High Court ought not to be made a ground for not proceeding with the pending suits. I have no doubt in. my mind that if the present suit which has not been stayed by this High Court was heard by the learned trial Judge, it would have been by now decided and probably appeal against the decree passed therein would also have been decided by the learned District Judge. In such a case this Civil Revision Application would have become in fructuous. Therefore, in order that administration of Justice may be toned up in the State of Gujarat and may not progressively become sluggish, all Civil Courts in the State are directed to bear in mind that unless the suit pending on their file has been stayed either by the District Court or by the High Court, they shall proceed with the hearing of the suit and shall not allow it to lie in cold storage merely because some interlocutory proceeding is pending before the District Court or in the High Court. All the Civil Courts shall act upon this direction.

4. xxx xxx x xx xxx

5. Revision allowed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //