ABHINAVA UPADHYA,J. - (1.) A suit for ejectment and arrears of rent being SCC suit no. 7 of 1988 has been filed by the plaintiff petitioner and the same is still pending.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only to the extent that the suit be directed to be decided expeditiously. The suit is of the year 1988. In the absence of necessary pleadings, this Court is not aware of the pendency of other old cases before the court concerned who is in seize of the present matter. Any direction for the early disposal of this suit would in fact amount to giving priority to the above suit over and above other cases which may be pending before the court concerned since before institution of the suit in question.
(3.) REFERENCE may be made on a Division Bench of this Court in Km. Shobha Bose Vs. Judge Small Causes and others 2010 (1) ADJ 531 (DB) wherein it has been held as under: "We are of the opinion that power to direct expeditious disposal of suit or for that matter any lis which, in sum and substance, means out of turn disposal is to be exercised sparingly in extraordinary circumstances and not in a routine manner. It is fit to be exercised only when the Court comes to the conclusion that delay would cause gross injustice. However, while deciding this issue, the Court would bear in mind that it does not cause injustice to other litigants, who are waiting for justice from before because the very nature of order delays cases filed earlier. It causes resentment and dissatisfaction to those who are waiting for justice from before. It should be exercised only when it comes to the notice of this Court that Judge in seisin of the case is purposely avoiding to dispose of the suit for any oblique motive, which may defeat the justice. An order for expeditious disposal in a routine manner can not be countenanced." ;