Dismissed

Ramprasath v. Priya

Madras HC3 Oct 2023CRP(MD)/2489/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a revision petition seeking a direction for early disposal of a matrimonial petition pending for four years. The Court refused to fix a timeline without pendency details but directed the trial court to prioritize it per High Court circulars.

What did the court decide?

No direction to dispose within a specified time; trial court directed to give priority under Circulars.

Ramprasath Vs Priya — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P.(MD)No.2489 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.10.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

C.R.P.(MD)No.2489 of 2023

¶7

Ramprasath ... Petitioner/ Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Priya ... Respondent/ Respondent

¶10

Prayer : This Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to direct the learned Sub Court, Tiruchendur to dispose the H.M.O.P.No.63 of 2019, within time framed fixed by this Court.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sivabalan

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking a direction to dispose of the petition in H.M.O.P.No.63 of 2019, pending on the file of

¶14

the Sub Court, Tiruchendur, within a specified time fixed by this Court.

¶15

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

C.R.P.(MD)No.2489 of 2023

¶17

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. Since the revision petition is filed for early disposal of the case, the issuance of notice to the respondent is not necessary.

¶18

The revision petitioner has filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.63 of 2019 to dissolve the marriage solemnized on 29.05.2015 between the revision petitioner and the respondent.

¶19

The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that the above petition was referred to the mediation centre, but the mediation was ended in failure, that since the case is pending for the last 4 years without any progress, the revision petitioner is put to irreparable hardship and that therefore, the trial has to be expedited.

¶20

The fact remains that the HMOP was filed in the year 2019. The High Court has already issued circulars to the District Judiciary, directing the Courts to give priority for the cases relating to Senior Citizens, HIV affected persons, Defence Personnel, Women and Children, more than 5 year old cases etc., It is to be noted that the revision petitioner, without approaching the trial Court, has directly come forward with the present

¶21

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

C.R.P.(MD)No.2489 of 2023

¶23

Revision Petition before this Court, seeking early disposal. In the absence of total pendency particulars and the work burden of that particular Court, this Court is not inclined to give any direction to dispose of the case within a specified period of time.

¶24

However, the trial Court is required to give priority to the cases, as per the Circulars of the High Court. The revision petitioner is at liberty to approach the trial Court and if such requisition for early disposal of the case is made, the learned trial Judge is required to consider the urgency for early trial, in the light of the circulars issued by this Court.

¶25

With the above observation and direction, the Civil Revision

¶26

Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶27

03.10.2023

¶28

NCC :yes/No Index :yes/No Internet:yes/No csm

¶29

¶30

The Sub Court, Tiruchendur.

¶31

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶32

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

¶33

3/4

¶34

C.R.P.(MD)No.2489 of 2023

¶35

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

¶36

csm

¶37

Order made in C.R.P.(MD)No.2489 of 2023

¶38

Dated : 03.10.2023

¶39

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Ramprasath v. Priya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramprasath v. Priya

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

M/S.Royal Sundaram Alliance Vs Poolraj

The Manager Vs Chinnaiyan

Branch Manager Vs Ponnalagu

Adaikalasamy, Vs Adaikalasamy

Maheshwari, Vs Ponnuthai

Karthick Vs Muppakkarai (Died) 1. Muthulakshmi