‘It is often said that litigation in this country, particularly on the Civil side, commences only after obtaining a decree while executing,’ it said.
Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, while disposing of a second appeal, made a pertinent observation with regard to the avoidable delay occurring in the matter of disposing civil cases. He observed that a person who approaches the court must be able to enjoy the fruits of a decree and he cannot be made to suffer indefinitely even after a contest of a claim in a court of law.
The judge, while dismissing the appeal imposing exemplary cost on the appellant, also said it is the duty of the court to put a ceiling on unnecessary delay in the matter of enjoying the fruits by a decree holder. He remarked: “It is often said that a litigation in this country, particularly on the Civil side commences only after obtaining a decree while executing.”
In the instant case, a suit for possession, use and occupation charges and permanent prohibitory injunction, instituted in the year 2000, was decreed in 2008. The appellant before the high court had entered appearance in execution proceedings, alleging that decree was obtained behind his back.
Coming down heavily on the appellant for abusing the process of the court, it observed: “The judicial system has been abused and virtually brought to its knees by unscrupulous litigants like the appellant in this case. It has to be remembered that Court’s proceedings are sacrosanct and should not be polluted by unscrupulous litigants.”
The court further remarked: “One has only to engage professionals to prolong the litigation so as to deprive the rights of a person and enjoy the fruits of illegalities. The Court has been used as a tool to perpetuate illegalities and have perpetuated an illegal possession. It is on account of such frivolous litigation that the court dockets are overflowing.”
Read the Judgment Here