IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 692 of 2010 (M/S) Smt. Kalawati & others ………..Petitioners Versus Smt. Shanti Devi & others …….Respondents Shri Neeraj Garg, learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri T.S. Bindra, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1,2 &3. Dated: 11th June, 2010 Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Present petition has been filed by the petitioners for direction to the learned ADJ/FTC-1, Dehradun, or District Judge, Dehradun, or the Court concerned, to decide and dispose of Misc. case no.108 of 2008, pending in the Court of ADJ/FTC-1, Dehradun, expeditiously. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the Predecessor of petitioners instituted a Suit no.424 of 1969 before the Court of Munsif, Dehradun, for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the tenanted property of the plaintiff and further sought mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the Boulders and Bazri stocked by him at the plaintiff’s portion. The said suit was dismissed on 06.06.1970. Against the said judgment and decree, the predecessor in interest of petitioners Shri Mahaveer 2 filed Civil Appeal no.60 of 1970 before the Court of District Judge, Dehradun, which was later-on transferred to the Court of 2nd Additional Civil Judge, Dehradun, who vide judgment and decree dated 21.12.1970 allowed the appeal and decreed the suit of plaintiff Mahaveer and restrained the defendants from interfering in peaceful possession of the plaintiffs and further directed the defendant to remove the structures made by him on the land in suit within a period of two months from the date of judgment. Against the said judgment and decree dated 21.12.1970 passed by learned 2nd Additional Civil Judge, Dehradun, in Civil Appeal no.60 of 1970 the predecessor of respondent Shri Suraj Mal filed Second Appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad being Second Appeal no.429 of 1971, which was decided vide judgment dated 27.09.1980 in terms of compromise. The petitioners are the legal heirs of the late Shri Raghuveer, brother of the plaintiff Shri Mahaveer and as such they filed execution petition no.23 of 1987 before the Court of Munsif, Dehradun, for execution of the decree. The said execution petition being execution case no.23 of 1987 filed by the petitioner is pending since long period of about 23 years and the same could not be decided till date. Shri Pyare Lal, predecessor of the respondents filed a Suit no.269 of 1988- Pyare Lal Vs. Surajmal and others, in the court of Munsif, Dehradun, for injunction restraining Shri Surajmal and the present petitioners from interfering in his peaceful possession over the property in question. On 22.11.1994, respondents filed amendment application in Suit no.269 of 1988. On 06.12.2001, Asstt. Session Judge/F.T.C.-9, Dehradun dismissed an amendment application dated 22.11.1994. The respondents filed Civil Revision no.288 of 2001- Pyare Lal Vs. Surajmal, in the Court of District Judge, Dehradun challenging the order dated 06.12.2001 passed by Asstt. Session Judge/ F.T.C.-9, Dehradun, rejecting the amendment application of the respondents. On 03.09.2008, A.D.J./ F.T.C.-1, Dehradun dismissed the Civil Revision no.288 of 2001. The respondents filed Review Petition being Misc. Case no.108 of 2008- Smt. Shanti Devi Vs. Sharad Kumar, in the Court of A.D.J./F.T.C.-1, Dehradun for reviewing the order dated 03.09.2008 passed in Civil Revision no.288 of 2001. The Review Petition is pending since 2008 and proceedings of O.S. No.269 of 1988 are kept in abeyance and under the garb of pendency of O.S. No.269 of 1988 respondents are delaying the execution proceedings being Execution Case no.23 of 1987 and petitioners are unable to get justice after contesting litigation since last 41 years and the Review Petition is being delayed by the respondents. Hence, this writ petition was filed. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since the matter pertains to the proceedings of Suit no.424 of 1969, the expeditious disposal of the Misc. Case no.108 of 2008 is necessary. At this learned counsel for the respondents also said that he has no objection, in case prayer for expeditious disposal of said Misc. Case no.108 of 2008 is allowed. 4 Accordingly, in the interest of justice, this Court thinks it fit and proper to direct the Court concerned to decide the case very expeditiously. Therefore, the learned ADJ/FTC-1, Dehradun or the Court concerned is directed to decide the review petition being Misc. Case no.108 of 2008- Shanti Devi Vs. Sharad Kumar within a period of 6 months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. With these direction, the writ petition is disposed of. (V.K. Bist, J.) Arpan 11.06.2010