S. Mariyam Firthose v. S.Shanavas

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN Mrs.S.Mariyam Firthose ... Petitioner / Petitioner

Versus

1. Mr.S.Shanavas

2. Mrs.S.Dowlath Bebe ... Respondents / Respondents Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 227 of Constitution of India, to grant an order of speedy disposal of the case in D.V.C.No.15 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai, Coimbatore, within the time frame fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.N.Kamalanathan for A.Parthasarathy and Associates

O R D E R

Seeking a direction for the speedy disposal of the case in D.V.C.No.15 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai, Coimbatore, the petitioner has preferred the present civil revision petition. 2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit 1/6

that the marriage between the revision petitioner and the first respondent was solemnized on 26.02.2017. Out of the said wedlock, a male child was born, who is now aged about 7 years. The petitioner has been living separately for the past 4 years. As the first respondent failed to take any step for reunion, the petitioner came to an irrevocable conclusion that the matrimonial relationship has irretrievably broken down and there is no purpose in continuing the marriage. Hence, the petitioner filed O.S.No.56 of 2022 before the learned Additional Family Judge, Coimbatore, seeking dissolution of marriage, which is still pending. The petitioner has also filed a complaint under the Domestic Violence Act in D.V.C.No.15 of 2024 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai, which is also pending, causing severe hardship and irreparable loss to the petitioner. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that the expeditious disposal of D.V.C.No.15 of 2024 is just and necessary in the interest of justice.

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 2/6

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 3/6

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 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 4/6

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 Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai, Coimbatore, is requested to dispose of the case in D.V.C.No.15 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible.

7. With the above observations, this Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

14.10.2025 av Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No Neutral Case Citation : Yes/No To The learned Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai, Coimbatore. 5/6

M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

av 14.10.2025 6/6