IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.556 of 2010 (M/S) Rajan Kaushal .…Petitioner Versus Hemant Kumar & another ...Respondents Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.C. Arya, Brief Holder for the State/respondent no.2. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a direction to respondent no.2 to decide S.C.C. Suit No.10 of 2003 Rajan Kaushal vs. Hemant Kumar expeditiously. Brief facts of the case are that on 26.03.2003 petitioner instituted a S.C.C. Suit No.10 of 2003 in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dehradun with the averments that he is the landlord of the property and respondent no.1 is tenant. But respondent no.1 was not paying rent and was in default of payment of rent. The said suit was registered as S.C.C. Suit No.10 of 2003 in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dehradun. On 26.03.2003 Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dehradun issued notice to respondent no.1 and fixed 01.05.2003 for filing written statement and 08.05.2003 for framing issues. On the date fixed i.e. 01.05.2003 respondent no.1 was present and sought time for filing his written statement. After showing his appearance on 01.05.2003 respondent no.1 sought several dates for filing written statement and finally filed the same on 27.08.2004 i.e. about one year & three 2 months. On 27.08.2004 learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Dehradun fixed 20.11.2004 in the matter. On the date fixed i.e. on 20.11.2004 petitioner moved an application under Order 15 Rule 1 read with Order 8 Rule 10 C.P.C. but the application was not decided on that day. Since then the same is pending for disposal in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dehradun. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that order sheet of the suit reveals that respondent no.1 sought twelve adjournments which he sought only for the purpose of delaying the proceedings of the suit. He also submitted that there is one year and three months delay in filing the written statement by which inference can be drawn against respondent no.1 that from the initial stage of the case, the respondent no.1 was interested to prolong the proceedings of the suit. He further prayed that his suit may be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year. In view of the fact that the S.C.C. Suit No.10 of 2003 is pending from the year 2003 and seven years have been passed, the respondent no.2/Judge S.C.C./Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dehradun is directed to decide the S.C.C. Suit No.10 of 2003 expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from today. Both the parties undertake that they will cooperate in the hearing of the case. The writ petition is disposed of. All pending applications stand disposed of. (V.K.Bist. J,) 04.06.2010 Arti 3