P.Senthil v. S.Priya
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN P.Senthil S/o. Late M.Poongavanam, No. 19, North Mada Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34.
Permanent Residing at.
No. 23 Mclennan OaK, San Antonio, TX-7824, USA.
Petitioner Vs S.Priya W/o. P.Senthil, Old No. 11/1, New No. 16, 2nd Trust Link Street, Mandaveli, Chennai-28.
Respondent PRAYER This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to order for a speedy trial of the Case in HMOP No. 260 of 2021 pending on the file of the Honble IV Additional Principal Family Court at Chennai and dispose of the same on merits within a period of three months and pass such further or other order or orders as this Honble Court. 1/7
For Petitioner(s):
M/s. L.Margret
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking a direction for the speedy disposal of the case in HMOP No. 260 of 2021 pending on the file of the IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai and dispose of the same on merits within a period of three months.
2.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has filed a petition in HMOP No.260 of 2021 under Section 13(1)(ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking to dissolve the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent, before the learned IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Chennai. He would further submit that the said petition is pending from 2021 onwards. Hence, he seeks speedy disposal of the said petition.
2/7
3.
It is pertinent to mention that High Court cannot issue such directions for speedy disposal unless there is a justification (or) acceptable reasons for issuing any such directions. It is relevant to cite the judgment of this Court in S.Baby Vs. S.Sakkubai Ammal reported in 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 674, wherein, it has been held in paragraph nos.11 and 12 as follows: "11. In the event of issuing direction in Civil Revision Petitions for speedy disposal without considering the number of cases pending in a particular Court on Board, it will result in discrimination against many other litigants, who all are waiting for disposal of their respective cases. There are allegations against the Courts that the cases are selectively picked up and disposed of.
The plight of the poor and downtrodden are also to be taken into consideration, while disposing of the cases. The Court shall not pave way for such feeling to the litigants. The trust on the Judicial System is the Hallmark and any form of favouritism, nepotism or otherwise even in the matter of hearing of cases selectively will have larger repercussions on the system. No doubt certain cases are to be disposed of urgently, if there is a public interest involved or the litigants are able to establish genuine urgency for early disposal of the cases. Such cases alone are to be given priority.
12. The practice of giving preference to any litigation without any justification at all circumstances to be avoided. Every litigant approaching the Court of Law is waiting for justice and thus, it must be done in a consistent manner and without discriminating the litigants. Therefore issuing directions indiscriminately for speedy disposal of cases would do no service to the cause of justice. Every urgency cannot be considered for issuing a direction for speedy disposal, and the urgency, which is imminent alone to be considered."
4.
It is also relevant to cite the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra reported in 2024 INSC 899, wherein, it has been held as follows: "In paragraph 47.3 of the decision of a Constitution Bench of in the case of 'High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. reported in (2024) 6 SCC 267, this Court has held that in the ordinary course, the Constitutional Courts should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other Courts. Paragraph 47.3 reads thus:
"47.3. Constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of 4/7
cases pending before any other courts. Constitutional courts may issue directions for the time-bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts concerned where the cases are pending;" (underline supplied) A direction which can be issued in exceptional circumstances is being routinely issued by High Courts without noticing the law laid down by the Constitution Bench."
5.
By applying the ratio laid down in the above judgments, fixing a time-bound schedule for the Court below to dispose of the cases pending therein is not warranted. The Court concerned is expected to regulate its own procedure in respect of the cases on board for effective disposal and to ensure that the cases are disposed of within a reasonable period of time. 6.
In view of the same, the learned IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai, shall dispose of the HMOP No.260 of 2021 as expeditiously as possible.
5/7
7. With the above observations, this civil revision petition stands disposed of. No costs.
04-09-2025 mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To The IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai.
6/7
M.JOTHIRAMAN J.
mfa 04-09-2025 7/7