Impleadment before Tribunal and timely disposal of Order 7 Rule 11 application directed to prevent delay

Where a petitioner was not impleaded in an appeal before the Tribunal, the proper course was to seek impleadment and recall of the ex parte order before that forum. A pending application under Order 7 Rule 11, concerning whether the suit was impliedly barred, was also identified as requiring prompt disposal. To avoid further delay, the court issued a time-bound direction to the civil court to decide that application within four months of production of a certified copy of the order, while leaving the petitioner to pursue the Tribunal remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner should seek impleadment before the Tribunal and whether the civil court should decide the pending application under Order 7 Rule 11 expeditiously.

Analysis: The order records that the petitioner was not impleaded in the appeal before the Tribunal and that the proper course was to move the Tribunal for impleadment and for recall of the ex parte order. It also notes that an application under Order 7 Rule 11 was pending before the civil court on the question whether the suit was impliedly barred. To prevent further delay, a time-bound direction was issued to the civil court to decide that application within four months of production of a certified copy of the order.

Conclusion: The petitioner was left to pursue the remedy before the Tribunal, and the civil court was directed to decide the application under Order 7 Rule 11 within the stipulated time.

Final Conclusion: The proceeding was disposed of with a procedural direction intended to secure an expeditious decision on the pending civil application.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious procedural remedy is available before the forum seized of the matter, and a related civil application is pending, the court may decline substantive interference and instead issue a time-bound direction for its disposal.

---