Allowed

Y.Lydial @ Lydial Emily Kumari, v. T.Kumar

Madras HC6 Oct 2021CRP/2167/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil revision petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court directed the Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore, to dispose a matrimonial suit pending for over five years within one month of receipt of the order, highlighting the lack of explanation for procedural delays.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore, to dispose I.D.O.P.No.451 of 2016 expeditiously, preferably within one month.

Y.Lydial @ Lydial Emily Kumari, Vs T.Kumar — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

C.R.P. (PD) No.2167 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 06.10.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

¶6

C.R.P. (PD) No.2167 of 2021

¶7

Y.Lydial @ Lydial Emily Kumari ... Petitioner
versus
T.Kumar ... Respondent

¶8

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the learned Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore, to dispose the petition in I.D.O.P.No.451 of 2016 pending on its file, within time bound manner as directed by this Court.

¶9

For Petitioner : M/s.V.S.Usharani

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

This Civil Revision Petition is filed seeking direction to the learned Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore, to dispose I.D.O.P.No.451 of 2016, within a time bound manner.

¶12

1/4

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶14

C.R.P. (PD) No.2167 of 2021

¶15

2 . The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, I.D.O.P.No.451 of 2016 was filed under Section 10(1) and (IX) & (X) of the Indian Divorce Act (IV) of 1869, seeking the relief of dissolution of marriage solemnised with the respondent on 14.07.2000. The respondent has filed counter and thereafter, the respondent did not appear, therefore,

¶16

ex parte order was passed. The case was pending for recording ex parte evidence from 13.11.2019 to 16.02.2021. The matter was adjourned to 20.04.2021 for orders. However, orders has not been passed and again, the matter was posted for appearance. The petitioner did not know the reason why the matter was again posted for appearance. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks direction to the learned Principal Family Judge for disposal of this petition in accordance with the law, within a time

¶17

frame to be stipulated by this Court.

¶18

3. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for

¶19

the petitioner and perused the records.

¶20

4. It is seen from the submissions of the learned counsel for

¶21

the petitioner and also the notes of adjudication that the matter was pending

¶22

2/4

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶24

C.R.P. (PD) No.2167 of 2021

¶25

for recording ex parte evidence from 13.11.2019 to 16.02.2021 and then

¶26

posted for orders on 20.04.2021. Again, the matter was pending for appearance from 20.05.2021 to 31.08.2021. It is not known why this matter was posted for appearance from 20.05.2021 when the matter was already

¶27

posted for orders on 20.04.2021.

¶28

5. This O.P. was filed in 2016 and it comes under the

¶29

category of old cases pending for more than 5 years and it should be given

¶30

priority for disposal. Therefore, the learned Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore, is directed to dispose I.D.O.P.No.451 of 2016 as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31

6. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.

¶32

However, there is no order as to costs.

¶33

06.10.2021

¶34

Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No psa / sri

¶35

3/4

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶37

C.R.P. (PD) No.2167 of 2021

¶38

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J.

¶39

psa / sri

¶40

¶41

The Principal Family Court, Coimbatore.

¶42

C.R.P. (PD) No.2167 of 2021

¶43

06.10.2021

¶44

4/4

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

Y.Lydial @ Lydial Emily Kumari, v. T.Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Y.Lydial @ Lydial Emily Kumari, v. T.Kumar

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

Anantha Jothi Vs Thangammal

Johnson (Since Deceased) Vs Ruckmani

Santhi Vs Palanivelu

Sivagami Vs Mythili

Ranganayagi Vs Mayilsamy

G.Balasubramania Iyer Vs the Commissioner