Lawyer Seeks Adjournment As The Mood Of The Court Is Bad, HC Allows The Request [Read Order]

The order dated February 4 discloses that Justice Raina dismissed four urgent cases listed before him that day, one after the other. This led to the Petitioner's counsel, Advocate KS Sidhu, assuming that the court was not in the right mood to allow his case.

However while adjourning the matter the court remarked that the case was not "worth admission" nonetheless.

"Counsel assuming that mood of the Court is bad this morning dismissing the first four urgent cases one after the other with orders dictated in Court, prays that time may be granted to him to argue the case on some other day. I grant permission for an adjournment but not without saying that those cases were not worth admission," the order read.

Notably, the previous two orders in the matter were also simple adjournment orders.

The rules for adjournments are listed under Order XVII of the CPC. Rule 1 thereunder clearly stipulates that the Court may grant an adjournment to a party if "sufficient cause" is shown; provided that no such adjournment shall be granted more than three times to a party during hearing.

Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 1 further stipulates that adjournments are to be granted only if the circumstances are "beyond the control" of the party who seeks it.

Case Details:

Case Title: Pappu Singh & Ors. v. Narinder Singh

Case No.: CR 6655/2019

Quorum: Justice Rajiv Narain Raina

Appearance: Advocate KS Sidhu

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order