Prem Chand v. Sham Lal And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: 24.04.2026 PREM CHAND ......PETITIONER Vs.

SHAM LAL .........RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present:

Mr.Sudesh Sahi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J.(ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of appropriate directions to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, to decide the suit for partition dated 14.12.2022, bearing No. CSCJ-21672022, titled as 'Prem Chand vs. Sham Lal', filed by the petitioner against the respondent, expeditiously, in a time-bound manner. 2.

Brief facts of the case are that the present petitioner, Prem Chand, filed a suit for partition, dated 13.12.2022 (Annexure P-3) of the suit property against the respondent, Sham Lal. Notice of the said suit was issued to the respondent, who appeared through his counsel on 07.02.2023 (Annexure P-6), and thereafter, the case was adjourned for filing of the written statement. On 13.03.2023 (Annexure P-7), an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, "the CPC") was filed by the respondent. Notice of the said application was

issued to the petitioner. Thereafter, on 04.05.2023 (Annexure P-8), a reply to the said application was filed by the petitioner and the case was repeatedly adjourned for arguments on the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

2.1 Further, the interim order dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure P-20) shows that the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, as there were chances of compromise between the parties. The interim order dated 10.07.2025 (Annexure P-21) further shows that the mediation has failed, and thereafter, the case was again fixed for arguments on the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC; however, till date, the said application has not been decided.

3.

In view of the facts of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that issuance of notice to the respondent would unnecessarily delay the proceedings; as such, issuance of notice to the respondent is dispensed with.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a direction be given to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, to decide the case expeditiously. He further submits that the next date of hearing before the learned trial Court is 06.07.2026 and prays that a direction be issued to the learned trial Court to decide the said application on the date fixed or, in the alternative, by granting a short adjournment. 5.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, to decide the said application either on the date fixed, i.e. 06.07.2026, or shortly thereafter, by granting a short adjournment, expeditiously, and

thereafter to decide the suit for partition as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

6.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

APRIL 24, 2026 (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) nitin JUDGE Whether Speaking Yes Whether Reportable No