Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) DEFECTS pointed out by the Registry is waived. Heard on merit.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioners submits that a civil suit bearing No. 89/2008, titled Rajmata Shiv Kumari & Ors. vs. Maharao Brajraj Singh & Ors., for declaration and partition is pending before the Court of Additional District Judge No. 4, Kota since 2008. It has been submitted that in the said suit, an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C. has been pending since 18.02.2013. Counsel submits that the said application seeking interim direction as prayed for therein ought to have been addressed with some expedition by the trial Court, as said properties are being alienated in the meantime, yet adjournments thereon are being granted for the asking and the said application continues to remain pending without just cause. Counsel submits that in this view of the matter, the Additional District Judge No. 4, Kota should be directed to dispose of the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C. filed on 18.02.2013 in civil suit No. 89/2008, titled Rajmata Shiv Kumari & Ors. vs. Maharao Brajraj Singh & Ors. within a reasonable time. Having heard the counsel for the petitioners, I am of the considered view that the prayer made for is not only innocuous. There is no conceivable reason as to why an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 should be pending before the trial Court for about a year. The stay application ought to be addressed one way or the other on its own merit. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Additional District Judge No. 4, Kota or the Presiding Officer to whom the suit/application may be transferred, to dispose of the pending application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C. in suit No. 89/2008 titled Rajmata Shiv Kumari & Ors. vs. Maharao Brajraj Singh & Ors. within a period of three months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order.;