Allahabad High Court Siddhartha Kumar And Others vs Upper Civil Judge, Senior Division, ... on 20 November, 1997 Equivalent citations: 1998(1)AWC593, (1998)1UPLBEC587 JUDGMENT O.P. Garg, J. 1. More often than not, this Court is faced with the petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in which an unpalatable. Irritating and perturbing prayer is made that the subordinate courts be commanded by means of writ of mandamus to proceed with, conclude and decide the long pending suits, appeals, revisions or other civil proceedings, including execution applications, etc., expeditiously or/and within the time to be phased by this Court. As exemplars, the following four writ petitions have been culled out to highlight the malady about the law's delays : 1. Civil Misc. Writ No. 25505 of 1997The petitioners filed Suit No. 204 of 1958 for the relief of permanent injunction which was decided in terms of compromise on 8.2.1960. The Judgment debtordefendants who are the respondents in the writ petition violated the terms of the compromise. The petitionerdecree holders had to file another Suit No. 69 of 1969 which was decreed on 20.7.1971. The appeal preferred by the judgment debtorrespondents was dismissed on 13.12.1971. The defendantJudgment debtors continued to flout the decree. Consequently, the plaintiffpetitioners filed an application under Order XXI. Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure [for short 'the Code') on 11.10.1994 (registered as Misc. Case No. 139 of 1994) in the court of Munsif (now Civil Judge. Junior Division), Mohammadabad. district Ghazipur. It appears that the trial/executing court went on postponing the matter, for one reason or the other, and ultimately on the application of the petitionerdecree holders, the case was transferred to the court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur. The respondentjudgment debtors filed objections under Section 47 of the Code raising almost the same questions which were the subjectmatter for decision in Original Suit Nos. 204 of 1958 and 69 of 1969. The grievance of the petitionerdecree holders is that they are facing the same problem before the transferee court as the matter has been allowed to pend by adjourning the case on different dates and ultimately, on 1.7.1997 stayed the execution proceedings. The petitionerdecree holders have come forward before this Court with the prayer that the court below be directed to decide the application under Order XXI, Rule 32 of the Code and the objection filed by the judgment debtorrespondents without loss of time as the decree passed way back in the year 1960 in Suit of 1958 continues to be fruitless due to the recalcitrant attitude and the machiniations of the Judgmentdebtorrespondents. 2 Civil Misc. Writ No. 24675 of 1997. A suit bearing No. 90 of 1972 (later on numbered as O. S. No. 286 of 1976) was instituted in the year 1972 by the present respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for partition of the share of the plaintiffpetitioners in houses, seventeen in number, situate at Jatipura Ward Varanasi and the grove land situate in village Kazi Saidullapur and other plots of land in village Alampur Varanasi. originally owned and possessed by the petitioners' great grandfather Ram Saran Lal. On the basis of a forged will of Ram Saran Lal, the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 applied for mutation, which was disallowed by the Administrator on 22.12.1959. Appeal No. 1144 of 1960 filed by the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 was allowed on 16.6.1960 on the basis of which they started interference with the rights of other cosharers in the property which was sought to be partitioned. After the filing of the Suit No. 90 of 1972 by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. the present petitioners also filed a suit for partition which was numbered as Suit No. 369 of 1973. This subsequent suit was stayed under Section 10 of the Code. The respondent Nos. 4 and 5 went on getting the Suit No. 90 of 1972 adjourned and after having remained successful in protracting the suit for about 8 years, filed a written statement on 19.9.1980. Since then the partition suit instituted in the year 1972 is pending and even the issues have not been framed. The result is that the two other suits of partition, being suit Nos. 90/1972 (286/76) and 369 of 1973 are virtually lying dead. It is prayed that the court below, i.e.. Ist Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Varanasi be commanded to decide the suits as early as possible or within the time prescribed by this Court. 3. Civil Misc. Writ No. 23718 of 1997. A prayer has been made that Suit No. 653 of 1988 pending in the court of IIIrd Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dehradun be directed to be decided as soon as possible. The suit was instituted on 26.10.1988 for partition of house Nos. 64B and 64D Lyton Road (Subhash Road), Dehradun. Written statements were filed by th