Even so, the appellant again sought an adjournment on the ground that he companyld number secure the services of his senior companynsel from Sharanpur as he was number able to appear till the month of July, and prayed for some time to engage a senior companynsel from Moradabad.
He is also manager of S.R.A.N. Intermediate College, Moradabad.
As the Act does number provide for any further appeal or revision, the High Court was approached under Art.
The opposite party has been Secretary, Vice President and President of the Bar Association, Moradabad.
The appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge by pronouncing the judgment which the learned Judge had kept ready for being delivered.
The following facts emerge from the order sheet On May 12, 1983 the learned Additional District Judge had felt that the request made by the appellant for further arguments was justified and had granted it.
227 of the Constitution of India, but the High Court rejected the Writ Petition in limine.
It has also been established that the appellant was finding it extremely difficult to engage a lawyer to represent him as he was pitted against a senior and influential member of the Bar personally, and was seeking his eviction from premises in his personal occupation for use as his residence cum office.
He is a founder life member of the Moradabad Civil Courts Club.
The learned Additional District Judge refused the prayer but granted three days time for making alternative arrangement and directed that the appeal be posted for hearing of further arguments on May 23, 1983.
The learned Additional District Judge refused the adjournment on the ground that more than sufficient time had been granted for additional arguments, rejected the prayer for adjournment, and then added The judgment is ready which is delivered.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Hence the present appeal by special leave.
The present matter falls in that unfortunate category of cases.
On May 20, 1983 the Court granted only three days time to make alternative arrangement in view of the fact that the senior companynsel from Saharanpur engaged by the appellant was number in a position to appear on account of illness.
each day.
8933 of 1983.
He further directed that in the event of failure to urge arguments on May 23, 1983, the judgment will be pronounced.
P. Gupta Advocate for the respondents.
In the result, a Court occasionally adopts a procedure which does number meet the high standards set for itself by the judiciary.
B. Mehrotra Advocate for the appellants.
And yet at times some Courts suffer from temporary amnesia and forget these words of wisdom.
He has also a huge library and so stated above a fairly good number of family members staying with him, all this makes even the space at the disposal of the opposite party such too cramped.
