S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9914/2010 Bhaskar A.Sawant Vs. Chandra Dutt Sharma Dated : 29.09.2010 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI,J. Mr. RS Yadav, for the petitioner. *** By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has beseeched to set aside the order dated 15th July, 2010 whereby the learned Additional District Judge No.9, Jaipur City, Jaipur declined to grant any other opportunity to the defendant to produce Mr. Bhaskar A.Sawant in evidence. Having reflected over the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully scanned the relevant material on record including the impugned order, it is noticed that the suit was fixed for recording the defendant's evidence on 22nd September, 2006. Thereafter, the Court granted opportunity 27 times to the defendant to produce the witness, in between 22nd September, 2006 to 6th February, 2009. The defendant produced only two witnesses namely, Rajendra Prasad and Mahesh Chand. Finally, the Court closed the defendant's evidence on 6th February, 2009. The story did not sum up here only. The defendant sought adjournment 13 times to argue the case but arguments never came to be advanced by the parties. Thereafter, the -2- petitioner filed an application on 20th March, 2010 imploring as stated above. Learned trial Court, having considered all these facts and circumstances of the case, rightly declined the prayer of the petitioner. The impugned order dated 15th July, 2010 is found to be just and proper and the same suffers from no infirmity. It is a settled law that the powers conferred upon the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution are discretionary in nature, which can be invoked for the enforcement of any fundamental right or legal right, but not for mere contractual rights arising out of an agreement, particularly in view of the existence of efficacious alternative remedy or legal right. In the instant case, the petitioner was given three and half years' time during which 27 opportunities were granted, but the petitioner did not avail them. In view of these circumstances, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is found to be totally frivolous, vexatious and prima facie unjust and the same deserves to be dismissed in limine. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition fails and the same being bereft of any substance, stands dismissed. (MAHESH BHAGWATI)J. Pcg item No.17