Disposed

Mark Jamian v. P. Priyanka Prabakar

Madras HC18 Sept 2018CRP/2780/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a civil revision petition filed under Article 227 seeking directions to the Family Court Chennai regarding a voluntary separation matrimonial dispute originally filed in 2016, directing expeditious disposal of the pending matter.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Family Court to dispose of the proceedings in O.P.No.4834 of 2016 expeditiously; liberty to seek a time limit if delay persists.

Mark Jamian Vs P. Priyanka Prabakar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 18.09.2018

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

C.R.P. (PD) No.2780 of 2018

¶7

Mark Jamian ...Petitioner
Vs
P. Priyanka Prabakar ...Respondent

¶8

PRAYER:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India to pass a direction directing the learned I Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai to dispose of the O.P.No.4834 of 2016.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mrs.K.Santhakumari
O R D E R

¶10

The limited prayer sought for in the present petition by the

¶11

petitioner/husband is for an expeditious disposal of the Original Petition seeking for divorce.

¶12

On perusal of the "A" diary extracts of the trial Court, it is seen that after service of notice, the counseling was held on various dates and the report has also been received by the trial Court on 13.07.2018. After that, the case has been referred to Lok Adalat. It is at this stage, the present revision has been filed seeking for disposal of the main Original Petition.

¶13

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶14

¶15

M.S.RAMESH, J. hvk

¶16

Though the proceedings are at the initial stage, it is seen that the

¶17

petitioner herein had initiated the case way back in the year 2016 and considerable time has been spent for service of notice and for counseling proceedings. As such, it would be appropriate to direct the trial Court to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible.

¶18

In the light of the above observations and also taking note of the

¶19

fact that the proceedings were initiated in the year 2016, there shall be a direction to the learned I Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai to dispose of the proceedings in O.P.No.4834 of 2016 as expeditiously as possible.

¶20

In case, the petitioner is of the view that inspite of this order,

¶21

there is an inordinate delay, it would be open to the petitioner to approach this Court seeking for fixing up a time limit for disposal of the main Original Petition.

¶22

With the above directions and liberty, the Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶23

18.09.2018

¶24

Index:Yes/No Internet: Yes/No hvk

¶25

To The I Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai.

¶26

C.R.P. (PD) No.2780 of 2018

¶27

http://www.judis.nic.in

Mark Jamian v. P. Priyanka Prabakar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mark Jamian v. P. Priyanka Prabakar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Venkatesan, M/61 Yrs Vs Mr.S.Sudhakar

A.Inayathullah Vs Zulaikha Begum Died

K.Palani Vs Krishnaveni

Prema Vs Jegan Babu

M.Narayanasami Vs G.Govindaraj Present Rustee

J.Chenakesavalu Vs M/S Suresh Rexine House