This civil revision petition sought a direction for the speedy disposal of a pending motor accident claim. While citing precedents opposing arbitrary time-bound orders, the High Court issued an order for disposal within four months due to the petitioner's vision loss and injuries.
Direction to dispose of M.C.O.P.No.113 of 2023 within four months of receipt of the order
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRP No.4490 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
CRP No.4490 of 2025
Manikandan
S/o.Periyasamy, No.16(1), Middle Street, Naramangalam Village, Perambalur Taluk and District.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1.Jeevanandham S/o.Thangasamy, 57/3B, Bharathidasan Nagar, Perambalur 12.
2.Magma HDI General Insurance Company Limited, Trichy.
Respondent(s)
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India to direct the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Perambalur, to take up the M.C.O.P.No.113 of 2023 and dispose it of at the earliest within a specified period.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Sathiyabal
1/7
ORDER
CRP No.4490 of 2025
Seeking a direction for the speedy disposal of the case in M.C.O.P.No.113 of 2023 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate Court), Perambalur, the petitioner has preferred the present civil revision petition.
Court in S.Baby Vs. S.Sakkubai Ammal reported in 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 674 , wherein, it has been held in paragraph nos.11 and 12 as follows:
2/7
CRP No.4490 of 2025
“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.
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 imminent alone to be considered.”
3/7
CRP No.4490 of 2025
4.
Court in Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra
reported in 2024 INSC 899 , wherein, it has been held as follows:
“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:
“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 time-bound 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)
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.”
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.
4/7
CRP No.4490 of 2025
6.
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perambalur, shall dispose of the case in M.C.O.P.No.113 of 2023 within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above observations, this civil revision petition stands disposed of. No costs.
19-09-2025
Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No nsd
To The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perambalur.
5/7
CRP No.4490 of 2025
M.JOTHIRAMAN J.
nsd
CRP No.4490 of 2025
6/7
CRP No.4490 of 2025
19.09.2025
7/7
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a time-bound schedule for disposal can be directed under Article 227 for urgent medical necessity?
Whether High Courts can issue directions for speedy disposal without exceptional circumstances?
Whether the case pending in the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal should be disposed within a specified period?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
S.Baby Vs. S.Sakkubai AmmalExplained¶24
S.Baby Vs. S.Sakkubai Ammal reported in 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 674 · Who else cites this
Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of MaharashtraExplained¶36
Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra reported in 2024 INSC 899 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Manikandan S/o.Periyasamy
Jeevanandham S/o.Thangasamy
Magma HDI General Insurance Company Limited
M.Jothiraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
