Disposed

A. Babu v. Rajina Stella

Madras HC3 Apr 2018CRP(MD)/661/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Single Judge Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227. The petitioner, father of the minor born to the respondents, sought speedy disposal of a guardianship custody petition against the mother. The court directed the Principal District Judge to decide the matter on a day-to-day basis within three months without adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Principal District Judge to dispose of G.W.O.P.No.29 of 2017 within three months on a day-to-day basis without adjournments.

A. Babu Vs Rajina Stella — Child Custody and Guardianship | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.04.2018

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN

¶6

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.661 of 2018

A.Babu

... Petitioner

Vs.

Rejina Stella

... Respondent

Prayer: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for a speedy disposal of G.W.O.P.No.29 of 2017 on the file of Principal District Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The revision petitioner is the father-in-law of the respondent herein. The petitioner's son married the respondent on 13.05.2013 and out of their wedlock, a female child was born on 09.10.2014. Due to sudden ill health, the petitioner's son died on 08.07.2016. Thereafter, the respondent went to her parent's house along with her minor daughter and refused to show the grand daughter to the petitioner and his wife. Hence, by considering the welfare of the grand daughter of the petitioner, he filed G.W.O.P.No.29 of 2017 before the Principal District Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, seeking handover the custody of his grant daughter and appoint him as guardian to her.

¶16

The above said petition was taken on file and posted for filing counter on the side of the respondent, but till date there is no progress, since the respondent is regularly getting adjournments. Hence, the petitioner has filed the Civil Revision Petition by invoking the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the extraordinary jurisdiction to direct the trial Court viz., the Principal District Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, for speedy disposal of G.W.O.P.No.29 of 2017.

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

Considering the nature of the prayer sought for in the Civil Revision Petition, this Court without issuing notice to the

¶19

¶20

respondent, since there is no prejudice would be caused to the respondent, on the ground that the petitioner sought for only speedy disposal, I am inclined to pass the following order:

¶21

The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, to dispose of the G.W.O.P.No.29 of 2017, on day-today basis, without giving any adjournment to either parties, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Both the parties are directed to give a fullest co-operation to the early disposal of the G.W.O.P.No.29 of 2017 within the time limit fixed by this Court in the Civil Revision Petition. No costs.

¶22

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CO)

¶23

/True Copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

The Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District, Srivilliputhur.

¶27

1 CC TO M/s.M.BABY SUDHA, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 59599 AKV

¶28

TE/KKR/SAR-4 : 10/04/2018 : 2P/3C

¶29

C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.661 of 2018 03.04.2018

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

A. Babu v. Rajina Stella

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A. Babu v. Rajina Stella

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopinath, Aged 36 Years, Vs State Rep. by

N.Narayana Reddy, M/a 68 Years Vs C.Suresh Babu

Shajahan, M/a 35 Years, Vs the State Rep by Its

S.Somasundaram Vs Palanivelu

A.Robi Mohan, S/O.Arulappan, Vs M.Samraj, S/O.Muthunayagam

J.Shandrasekaran, Vs M.Murugaboopathy