- (1.) JAGDISH Bhalla, J. This writ peti tion is directed against the order dated 20-4-2001 passed by the District Judge Unnao in resent appeal No. 60 of 2001, contained in Annexure No. 14 to the writ petition. The appeal against the order of Prescribed Authority has been admitted but interim relief application along with an application for issuance of commission has been rejected.
(2.) SRI Mohd. Arif Khan, Advocate, informs that he has sent a notice as Caveator on behalf of the respondents by registered post on 23-4-2001 and, there fore, he has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents. Heard learned Counsel for the par ties. It appears from the orders of the Prescribed Authority that the application for appointment of commissioner remained pending before the Prescribed Authority but no order could be passed and when an ap plication was preferred before the appellate authority the same has been refused on the ground that there is sufficient material on record. The allegation of the petitioner is with respect to Saw Mill business run by the son of opposite parties.
(3.) IN light of the cause referred under Article 226 of the Constitution of equi table justice I am of the considered opinion that the principle of natural jus tice will suffice if a commission is issued. However, keeping in mind that the Prescribed Authority took more than 10 years to pronounce his order and there after the appeal was filed time barred in the year 2000 and an application for issuance of commission was only moved on 18-4-2001, without making observation against either side, the fact remains that sufficient delay has been caused before the Prescribed Authority itself when he took about 10 years and the matter thereafter is still pending before the appellate Court. I have already expressed my opinion that there is a need of issuance of commission to verify the fact whether son of the op posite parties is running a Saw Mill? In view of the facts and circumstan ces I provide that let both the parlies ap pear before the District Judge, Unnao on 1st May, 2001. The District Judge, Unnao is directed to pass an order for issuance of Commission on the same day with a direc tion to the Commissioner to submit his report within 3 days. Thereafter, the learned Counsel for the parties, if they so desire, may file their objections within 3 days. The learned District Judge shall decide the appeal preferably before the Court closes for Summer Vacation. It is made clear that in case the Counsel for the parties are not available the case shall not be adjourned by the District Judge. Till the judgment the execution of decree shall be kept in abeyance.;