CWP-8414/2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. SB CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8414/2010 Ahmed Noor Versus The Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track No.3, Ajmer & ors. DATE OF ORDER : 06/07/2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI *** Mr. Ashish Saksena, for petitioner. Instant writ petition has been filed assailing the order Anx.16 dt. 22/06/2010 whereby while accepting the application filed by the defendants-respondents under Section 151 CPC, the learned Trial Judge has considered it appropriate to summon the record from the Nursing Home and also from the Municipal Council, Ajmer in the interest of justice for determining the date of birth of the second child of the petitioner which came for consideration in the Election Petition. The main thrust of the submission of counsel is that the Election Petition was filed by the petitioner in 2005 but for one reason or the other it could not be decided and remained pending and at the stage when the evidence of both the parties was closed and the case riped for final arguments, an application was filed under Section 151 CPC at the behest of the defendants-respondents for summoning the record of the Nursing Home and so also from the CWP-8414/2010 2 Municipal Council, Ajmer for determining the date of birth in regard to second child of the petitioner. The learned Trial Judge, after taking note of the objections made by the petitioner, considered it appropriate to allow the application filed by the defendants-respondents and directed to summon the record of the Nursing Home and so also the Municipal Council, Ajmer for determining the date of birth with regard to the second child of the petitioner in the interest of justice by passing the order dated 22/06/2010. Counsel for petitioner submits that after the Order 18 Rule 17-A CPC being deleted, the learned Trial Judge was not justified in summoning the record after the evidence in the case was closed and the matter riped for hearing. Counsel further submits that the delay in pendency of the Election Petition is also causing prejudice to the petitioner since nomination was rejected in 2005 only on the premise that the petitioner has a second child born on 05/04/1993 which was seriously disputed by the petitioner in the pending Election Petition in which it was specifically urged that the second child was born on 07/03/1992 and the nomination of the petitioner was CWP-8414/2010 3 arbitrarily rejected by the respondents. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and also perused the material on record. It appears that the only question, which calls for determination in the election petition filed by the petitioner, is with regard to the date of birth of second child of the petitioner and the relevant date, which was alleged by the defendants-respondents, was of 05/04/1993. However, the petitioner alleged that the date of birth of the second child was 07/03/1992. In view of such documentary evidence came on record in the election petition, in such circumstances, application was filed under Section 151 CPC by the defendants-respondents and the learned Trial Judge, in the interest of justice, considered it appropriate to summon the record from the Nursing Home and also the Municipal Council, Ajmer for determining the question raised in the election petition, in the interest of justice. In the facts and circumstances of the instant case, this Court does not find any manifest error being committed by the learned Trial Judge in passing the order impugned dt. 22/06/2010 so as to call for interference under writ jurisdiction of this Court. However, at the same time, this Court finds substance in CWP-8414/2010 4 the second submission of the petitioner made in regard to the delay in disposing of the election petition filed by the petitioner way back in 2005. Taking note of the submissions, this Court considers it appropriate to observe that the learned Trial Judge is expected to decide the pending election petition expeditiously but in no case later than two months. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. Raghu/p.4/ 8414-CW2010-final.doc