Ishwarlal Mali Rathod vs Gopal and Ors.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

20 September 2021

Case No.

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. 14117/2021

Result

Dismissed

Bench

M.R. Shah, A.S. Bopanna

Citation

[2021] 9 S.C.R. 35 : 2021 INSC 502

Headnote

Administration of Justice – Abuse of process of law – Repeated adjournments – Respondent-plaintiff filed suit inter alia for eviction in 2013 – Petitioner-defendant’s right to cross examine the plaintiff ’s witness was eventually closed in 2020 – Confirmed by High Court – Held: Ten times adjournments were given between 2015 to 2019 – Twice the adjournments were granted as a last opportunity and even cost was imposed – Trial Court and even the High Court continued to grant adjournments and as such contributed the delay in disposal of the suit – Adequate liberty was given to the defendant to cross examine the plaintiff ’s witness who never availed of the same and went on delaying the proceedings – Main suit is disposed of now – Petition dismissed.

Administration of Justice – Justice delivery system – Delay – Grant of adjournments – Duty of Courts – Discussed.

Shiv Cotex v. Tirgun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. (2011) 9 SCC

678 : [2011] 10 SCR 787; Babu Singh v. State of U.P. (1978) 1 SCC 579 : [1978] 2 SCR 777; Noor

Mohammed v. Jethanand and Anr. (2013) 5 SCC 202 : [2013] 3 SCR 1146 – relied on.

The Order of the Court was passed by M. R. SHAH, J. 1. Present is the classic example of misuse of the adjournments granted by the court. Present SLPs have been preferred challenging the impugned order dated 17.02.2021 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore in M.P. No.107 of 2021 and M.P. No. 108 of 2021 by which the High Court has dismissed the said misc. petition preferred by the petitioner – original defendant, confirming the order passed by the learned Trial Court dated 21.12.2020 closing the right to cross-examine the plaintiff’s witness. 2. Respondents No.1 to 4 h

View Subscription Plans →