A. Amirtham Vs N. Manohar Reddy

Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for speedy disposal of the suit registered as O.S.No.65 of 2016 pending on the file of in the Court of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate at Sriperumbudur shall be disposed off and justice to be rendered.

¶18

1/6

¶19

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

¶20

CRP.No.4471 of 2025

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Seeking a direction for the speedy disposal of the O.S.No.65 of 2016 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur, the petitioner has preferred the present civil revision petition.

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that the suit in O.S.No.65 of 2016 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur, seeking for declaration of a Sale deed dated 29.06.2000 which was fraudulently executed by the first defendant as General Power of Attorney of Mrs. Padmavathi Ammal who was deceased at that point of time. The entire sale transaction was initiated with a malafied notion to cause monetary loss to the plaintiffs. The said suit is of the year 2016 and more than 9 years have been lapsed, he prays for speedy disposal of the suit in O.S.No.65 of 2016 is just and necessary.

¶24

It is pertinent to mention that High Court cannot issue such directions for speedy disposal unless there is a justification (or) acceptable reasons for issuing any such directions. It is relevant to cite the judgment of this Court in S.Baby Vs. S.Sakkubai Ammal reported in 2023 SCC OnLine

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

CRP.No.4471 of 2025

¶28

Mad 674

¶29

Mad 674 , wherein, it has been held in paragraph nos.11 and 12 as follows:

¶30

“11. In the event of issuing direction in Civil Revision Petitions for speedy disposal without considering the number of cases pending in a particular Court on Board, it will result in discrimination against many other litigants, who all are waiting for disposal of their respective cases. There are allegations against the Courts that the cases are selectively picked up and disposed of. The plight of the poor and downtrodden are also to be taken into consideration, while disposing of the cases. The Court shall not pave way for such feeling to the litigants. The trust on the Judicial System is the Hallmark and any form of favouritism, nepotism or otherwise even in the matter of hearing of cases selectively will have larger repercussions on the system. No doubt certain cases are to be disposed of urgently, if there is a public interest involved or the litigants are able to establish genuine urgency for early disposal of the cases. Such cases alone are to be given priority.

¶31

12. The practice of giving preference to any litigation without any justification at all circumstances to be avoided. Every litigant approaching the Court of Law is waiting for justice and thus, it must be done in a consistent manner and without discriminating the litigants. Therefore issuing directions indiscriminately for speedy disposal of cases would do no service to the cause of justice. Every urgency cannot be considered for issuing a direction for speedy disposal, and the urgency, which is

¶32

3/6

¶33

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

¶34

CRP.No.4471 of 2025

¶35

imminent alone to be considered.”

¶36

It is also relevant to cite the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

¶37

Court in Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra

¶38

reported in 2024 INSC 899 , wherein, it has been held as follows:

¶39

“In paragraph 47.3 of the decision of a Constitution Bench of in the case of ‘High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. reported in (2024) 6 SCC 267, this Court has held that in the ordinary course, the Constitutional Courts should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other Courts. Paragraph 47.3 reads thus:

¶40

“47.3. Constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other courts. Constitutional courts may issue directions for the timebound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts concerned where the cases are pending;” (underline supplied)

¶41

A direction which can be issued in exceptional circumstances is being routinely issued by High Courts without noticing the law laid down by the Constitution Bench.”

¶42

4/6

¶43

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

¶44

CRP.No.4471 of 2025

¶45

By applying the ratio laid down in the above judgments, fixing a

¶46

time-bound schedule for the Court below to dispose of the cases pending therein is not warranted. The Court concerned is expected to regulate its own procedure in respect of the cases on board for effective disposal and to ensure that the cases are disposed of within a reasonable period of time.

¶47