High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/2775/2021dismissed

Chander Parkash And Others v. General Public

2021-11-15Mrs. Justice Alka Sarin2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CIVIL REVISION No.2775 of 2021 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 15.11.2021 Chander Parkash and others .....Petitioners versus General Public .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN

Present:

Mr. Gaurav Singla, Advocate for the petitioners ..

ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral):

Taken up through physical hearing.

The present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 09.11.2021 (AnnexureP-6) passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Palwal vide which the application for preponement of the case has been dismissed.

The brief facts relevant to the present case are that on 15.01.2021 the present petitioners filed a petition under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for the grant of succession certificate. The case was registered and the respondents (General Public) were directed to be served through publication in the newspaper "The Dainik Chetna". It is noted in the order dated 23.02.2021 that the service was complete and the respondents were proceeded against ex-parte. The evidence was recorded on 09.03.2021 and the case was adjourned for ex-parte arguments. Thereafter, on 03.05.2021, the matter was adjourned to 13.10.2021 PARKASH CHAND 2021.11.16 13:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CIVIL REVISION No.2775 of 2021 - 2 - keeping in view the instructions issued by this Court and the Office Order No.2135 dated 03.05.2021 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Palwal. On 13.10.2021, when the case was fixed for ex-parte arguments, the arguments were not advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the matter was adjourned to 02.02.2022. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the Court below is not proceeding with the matter expeditiously and has given a long date i.e 02.02.2022.

Heard.

In the present case, there has been no delay on the part of the Court below in hearing the matter. The matter was fixed for arguments on 13.10.2021 and it was the counsel for the petitioners who chose not to address arguments and in view thereof the matter was adjourned to 02.02.2022.

In view thereof, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order.

Dismissed.

(ALKA SARIN) JUDGE 15.11.2021 parkash NOTE:

Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO PARKASH CHAND 2021.11.16 13:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document