CR No.2269 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2269 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 5.4.2010 Mantra Inc. ......Petitioner(s) Versus M/s AAA Apparels Manufacturing Company ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manish Kumar, Mr. Nitin Bhatia, Advocate and Mr. Premjit Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. CM No.8618-CII of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CR No.2269 of 2010 By way of this petition, the plaintiff has sought directions to the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Gurgaon for expeditious disposal of the pending applications in Suit No.478/2006 as well as the civil suit within a specified time frame. As per the averments, the petitioner filed a suit for partition, rendition of accounts and permanent injunction against the respondents on the basis of averments made in the suit and documents attached therewith. It is the case of the petitioner that since its filing in September 2006, the suit has not proceeded any further and even various applications, filed by the petitioner such as application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for grant of ad interim injunction, application under Order 40 Rule 1 CPC for appointment of a Receiver, application under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC CR No.2269 of 2010 (O&M) 2 for not allowing the respondent to file written statement, application under Order 11 Rule 14 CPC directing the respondent to produce the documents, petition under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC for initiation of contempt proceedings and application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by the respondent for rejection of the plaint are not being decided, though the aforesaid applications are complete and ripe for arguments. It is the further case of the petitioner that the disposal of the aforesaid applications is imperative for the overall determination of the rights of the parties inter se under the suit and the pendency of these applications is delaying the trial of the suit. According to the petitioner, in spite of repeated requests of the petitioner, the trial Court is adjourning the case without there being any occasion or request made on behalf of the petitioner for adjournment and now the matter has been adjourned to 3.5.2010 vide order dated 28.10.2009, i.e after a period of five months, even though the applications as mentioned aforesaid are ripe for adjudication. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted before this Court that in the peculiar facts and circumstances, the powers of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India be invoked to impart justice and in order to ensure speedy culmination of the controversy, it is just and appropriate in the circumstances that the application as well as the suit filed by the petitioner is concluded without any further delay especially when the pleadings are complete. Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the monetary commitment of the parties inter se is of extreme magnitude. Thus, a direction has been sought to be issued to the trial Court to take up the applications and the suit and decide the same on merits immediately. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone CR No.2269 of 2010 (O&M) 3 through the record of the revision petition. Various zimni orders as reproduced in this petition have also been perused. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case especially, the fact that the civil suit was filed in the year 2006 and even the issues have not been framed till date and various applications, though complete, are pending adjudication, I direct the trial Court to dispose of the pending applications which are complete and ripe for arguments, without any further delay and as expeditiously as possible. The trial Court may also proceed with the main suit expeditiously, but in accordance with law. Disposed of. April 5, 2010 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE