Case not moving for last 6 years


My suggestion has been based on facts posted and the elements therefrom. There is no question of any examination of witnesses or cross examination therefrom in a revision petition, civil or criminal. It is for the queriest to address the misconception created by his own posting.


The first advocate I hired did not file the ejection case at all. Simply took money and gave false case number. My case never came for hearing. I lost 2 years like this. In meantime he went and adjust with respondent who is lady. From then till now 6 advocates changed but nothing is happening. Going to high court is impossible . Again new advocate. Whether he will get expedited hearing orders is uncertain. Neither the judge in lower court is passing orders. Now Corona break for court. But again some day court will open again. I fed up of advocates because whoever takes my case goes and adjust with respondent lady. So I took up my case myself and now in a fix. How to go about this?


The facts posted are inadequate make out the type of case you have filed. Certainly, it cannot be a revision petition. Please simple facts bringing out the primary, but material and essential details


The author may not be knowing the proper term.

It may be an appeal.

However in appeal also there is no necessity for chief and cross examination.

The author has clearly mentioned that the case has been decided and an eviction order has been passed by court  but the court has not passed an order for recovery of arrears of rent. 

It means the trial court has allowed the petition partly i.,e, the judgment in his favor was given in respect of eviction alone and may not be for other relief.

Therefore I find nothing wrong in expert learned advocate Mr. P. Venu's query.

The author seem to have roamed around the court for over six years  as per his verdict, hence he should be knowing the difference between revision, appeal or whatever the current status of the pending case.

Moreover he has become prudent enough to handle the case as party in person, hence his insistence on respondent's cross examination not happening in the revision petition is raising doubts about the actual status of the case.




Presuming that the court is not taking any action against the respondent for her non appearance before court for cross examination, the petitioner has a right to file a petition to eschew the entire chief examination before the trial court  for the reasons therein that  despite respondent had reopened the case twice but never bothered to be present for cross examination hence he same may be closed by passing an order for eschewing the chief evidence. 


It is case of rent not paying by tenant. She stopped paying rent. And her advance got over. Still she overstayed. Then I filed ejection suit. Asking ejection of tenant and recovery of dues if rent not paid by her. 1st lawyer did not file case at all but are up my money. From then till advocate no. 6 nobody got tenant vacated. But court passed order to vacate premises. Inspire of order she did not vacate. I have to file execution case to get her vacated. But as court gave only order to vacate and said nothing about payment of old dues of rent. The order of magistrate need to be modified . Hence revision case I got filed by advocate. Since neither respondent nor her advocate are appearing although my examination chief and cross examination are over regarding non receipt of rent. The respondent examination chief and cross examination are pending. Each time one of them appear and take date. Date. I am fed up of this advocate who never speaks anything before magistrate. So I told I will fight my case myself. Only examination chief and cross of respondent are pending. I've already made oral submission 4 times asking the judge to pass orders but to no avail. Can't go to high court. What to do?

The author's version is given below:

The matter is of rent and evacuation. Though the court gave order for eviction. The rent due from respondent was not ordered. So I've filed revision petition. Asking court to get me rent from respondent.


From this the following can be understood:

1.  The original petition seeking several reliefs, was  disposed by the trial court by partly allowing the petition  granting the relief of eviction alone.

2.  The petitioner has preferred an appeal against the aggrieved judgment  which did not allow the recovery of rent before the appellate court in the district level and it is not  revision [petition pending before the appellate court because  revision can be filed before high court only and also there is no question of filing a revision petition once the case has been disposed.

3. In the appeal there is no question of chief examination or cross examination, hence the statement made by the author in the form of query is certainly a misleading hence any opinion given to his vague query would be a misleading opinion.

4. Since there is no examination of witness in appeal, the next step after the respondent appears before court is enquiry, i.e., the court will post the matter for arguments by petitioner/appellant and respondent.

So it is better that the querist reverts with the actual details.

Moreover due to current pandemic crisis the courts are expected to reopen by the end of April only, hence he cannot do anything now about it.



In Website of court it's mentioned as examination chief and cross examination. That's how I know this terms.



Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


  Search Forum



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
Muslim Personal Law     |    x