Allowed

S.Dyana @Dyana Roselin Kiruba v. Davidraja

Madras HC12 Oct 2020CRP(MD)/752/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil revision petition under Article 227 challenged the inordinate delay in a divorce case filed by the petitioner. The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the Principal District Judge to dispose of the matter on merits as expeditiously as possible without going into the merits of the underlying allegations.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Principal District Judge, Madurai to dispose of D.O.P.No.84 of 2018 on merits as expeditiously as possible.

S.Dyana @Dyana Roselin Kiruba Vs Davidraja — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

C.R.P(MD).No.752 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 12.10.2020

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M. GOVINDARAJ

¶6

C.R.P(MD).No.752 of 2020

¶7

S. Dyana @ Dyana Roselin Kiruba ... Petitioner/Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Davidraja ... Respondent/Respondent

¶10

Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to issue a direction to the Principal District Court, Madurai to expedite the trial in D.O.P.No.84 of 2018 on the file of the Principal District Court, Madurai and dispose the same within a time limit as stipulated by this Court.

¶11

For Petitioner ... Mr.R. Jegadeeswarran

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision Petition invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying for a direction to the Principal District Court, Madurai to dispose of the case in D.O.P.No.84 of 2018 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Since the case is for a limited relief of early disposal, no notice need be sent to the respondents.

¶15

The revision petitioner, who is wife of the respondent herein, has filed a petition in D.O.P.No.84 of 2018, on the file of the Principal District Court, Madurai, for divorce and the same has been periodically adjourned for the past two years without any progress, even after filing the counter on 11.06.2019. Hence, she has filed the present Civil Revision Petition seeking a direction to dispose the D.O.P.No.84 of 2018, within a stipulated time.

¶16

Considering the limited relief sought for by the revision petitioner, without going into the merits and demerits of the allegation raised by the revision petitioner, this civil revision petition is disposed of with the following direction:

¶17

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

¶18

1/2

¶19

C.R.P(MD).No.752 of 2020

¶20

“The learned Principal District Judge, Madurai is directed to dispose of D.O.P.No.84 of 2018, pending on his file, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, if it is otherwise in order.

¶21

No costs.

¶22

Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

trp

¶25

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶26

¶27

The Principal District Court, Madurai.

¶28

C.R.P(MD).No.752 of 2020 12.10.2020

¶29

SE(CO)

¶30

TR(21.10.2020) 2P 2C

¶31

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

¶32

2/2

S.Dyana @Dyana Roselin Kiruba v. Davidraja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Dyana @Dyana Roselin Kiruba v. Davidraja

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

Kasthuri Vs K.Neelamegam

The Special Tahsildar(Adw), Vs Karuppasamy, S/O. Kalimuthu

The Special Tahsildar (La), Vs K.H.Sankara Narayanan

Senthur Pandian Nadar Vs Jeypandia Nadar (Died)

The Revenue Divisional Officer Vs K.Rajamanickam Chettiar (*)

The Special Tahsildar, Vs P.Murugeshapandian (Died)