Col Prashant Pandit Vs Maj (Retd) Dr Monica… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Col Prashant Pandit Vs Maj (Retd) Dr Monica… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The mandamus for priority adjudication of HMA/1113/2023 was declined; however, the Family Court, Gurugram was directed to make all endeavours to decide the matter most expeditiously, considering the ages of the parties.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue to the Principal Presiding Judge, Family Court, Gurugram to adjudicate case HMA/1113/2023, specifically in view of the mandatory provisions of Section 21-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. +1 more

Court's answer

The mandamus seeking priority adjudication of HMA/1113/2023 is declined: given the heavy docket of Family Courts, such a mandamus is not practically feasible, as it would require the Presiding Officer to take up the matter on priority over and above matters already pending consideration.

Ratio / Principle

There is no inordinate delay on the part of the Family Court in the progress of the proceedings, as is clear from the zimni orders.

Key takeaways

Considering the ages of the petitioner and the respondent, the Family Court is directed to make all its endeavours to decide the instant matter most expeditiously.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus to the Principal Presiding Judge, Family Court, Gurugram to adjudicate matrimonial case HMA/1113/2023 (dated 28.7.2023) on priority in view of Section 21-B, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Held, dismissed. Zimni orders showed 10 adjournments, of which 05 were directly attributable to the petitioner, and an application under Section 24 HMA remained pending with the petitioner having sought time for his response. Though the mandate of Section 21-B was not disputed, a mandamus to take the case out of turn is not practically feasible given the heavy docket of Family Courts, and no inordinate delay by the Family Court was found. Considering the ages of the parties, the Family Court was directed to make all endeavours to decide the matter most expeditiously. (Kuldeep Tiwari, J., 22.05.2025)

114

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-10473-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 22.05.2025

COL. PRASHANT PANDIT

.....Petitioner

VERSUS

MAJ. (RETD.) DR. MONICA KHANNA .....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present : Dr. Juhi Goel , Advocate, for the petitioner.

KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral)

CM-7592-CWP-2025

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions, and the zimni orders in case HMA/1113/2023, dated 28.7.2023, are ordered to be taken on record as Annexure P-7 (colly.) and exemption is also granted from filing the certified copies thereof.

CWP-10473-2025

Through the instant writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made for issuance of a mandamus upon Principal Presiding Judge, Family Court, Gurugram, to adjudicate the case HMA/1113/2023, dated 28.7.2023, titled as “Col.Prashant Pandit vs. Maj.(Retd.) Monica Khanna”(Annexure P-1), and specifically in view of the mandatory provisions of Section 21-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (as amended upto date).

DHARAM VIR 2025.05.27 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-10473-2025 (O&M) -2- 3. This Court has perused the zimni orders, as have been placed

on record vide Annexure P-7 (Colly.), which reflects that out of 10 adjournments, 05 adjournments are directly attributed to the present petitioner. What further reflects that the final adjudication of application filed under the provisions of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is still pending before the Family Court concerned, wherein, the petitioner has also sought time for filing his response.

Though there is no dispute about the mandate, as enclosed in Section 21-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, however, this Court cannot obviate the facts regarding the heavy docket of Family Courts, therefore, such a mandamus may not not be practically feasible, upon the Presiding Officer to take up the instant matter on priority basis, over and above the matters which are already pending consideration. Further, This Court does not find any inordinate delay on the part of the Family Court concerned, in the progress of the proceedings of the instant matter, which is very much clear from the zimni orders. Therefore, the asked for mandamus is hereby, declined .

However, considering the age of the present petitioner as well as that of the respondent, this Court deems it apt to direct the Family Court concerned, to make all its endeavours to decide the instant matter, most expeditiously.

May 22, 2025	(KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE
dharamvir
Whether speaking/reasoned.	: Yes/No
Whether Reportable.	: Yes/No

DHARAM VIR 2025.05.27 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document