CRP 68/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HN SARMA The petitioner in the instant petition has prayed for revising and setti ng aside the order 17-11-2008 passed in Title Suit No.43 of 2008 by the learned Munsiff No.1, Dibrugarh in exercising the superintending jurisdiction under Arti cle 227 of the Constitution of India. Heard Mr. M. Choudhury learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradip Sen Deka, learned Government Advocate. Vide impugned order the prayer for adjournment to produce the PWs for cr oss-examination was rejected by the learned Munsiff and the evidence-in-affidavi t of PWs were declared as expunged. The petitioner is the plaintiff in TS No.37 of 1997 which subsequently renumbered as TS No.43/2008. Although the suit was f iled about 12 years ago, for various reasons including laxity shown by the learn ed Trial Court the suit has not yet attained its finality. It is the classic exa mple as to how the objects of amendments of the C.P.C made in 1999 and 2002 are being frustrated. Be that as it may, when the suit is listed for hearing the plaintiff fil ed their in-chief evidence-in-affidavit and the suit was 8-12-2004 for cross-exa mination of PWs. Thereafter, various dates were fixed for cross examination of t he PWs and the P.O, remained on leave and the matter continued in that fashion t ill 30-6-2006, on which date the record of the suit was forwarded to the Distric t Magistrate as the suit was valued lesser than Rs.2,00,000/- and record of suit was returned on 27-2-2008 and thus about one & half year was spent in the Court of District Judge, Dibrugarh for passing only an administrative order thereby c ausing inordinate delay in disposal of the case. After return of the record the suit was fixed on 17-3-2008 and ultimatel y the parties appeared but as many as five dates were spent in informing the lea rned counsels of both the parties about the return and receipt of the case recor d. On 16-8-2008 both the parties appeared in the suit and again fixed 25-9-2008 for cross-examination of PWs, on which date it was adjourned on the prayer of t he plaintiff till 17-11-2008. On 17-11-2008 the plaintiff again prayed for adjou rnment as he was busy for certain urgent official matters which are not disclose d. Mr. M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitio ner is an employee of the District Poultry Firm, Khanikar and during that period he had to be busy on emergency work of Bird Flue operation. The learned Magistr ate vide order dated 17-11-2008 rejected the prayer of the plaintiff for adjourn ment considering the fact that several opportunities were given to the plaintiff for procuring the attendance of PWs to face cross-examination which he failed t o do and adjournment petition is also not supported by the affidavit. While reje cting the prayer for adjournment, the learned Trial Court has also expunged the affidavit-in-evidence of PWs. Considering the facts in its entirety and the manner and method in which the petitioners case continued for last 12 years and now is at the stage of cro ss-examination of PWs, it is observed herein that the suit has not been proceede d in the right direction with the spirit of the C.P.C requiring early disposal o f such suits for which parties are not to be blamed alone. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and taking a liberal view, the petitioner is granted one more chance to produce witnesses for cross examination. The petitioner shall produce his witnesses on the next date fixed positively to face cross-examination by the defendants. The learned Munsi ff is further directed to consider about the maintainability of the suit under t he provision of 154(A) of Assam Land & Regulation Act taking note of the decis ion of this Court, reported in 1989 GLR 131. The learned Munsiff is further directed to dispose the entire proceeding s within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this ord er. In view of the above discussions, the impugned order dated 17-11-2008 st ands set aside and quashed but subject to the payment of Rs.1000/- to be deposit ed by the plaintiff on next date in favour of the defendant before the Trial Cou rt.