Sri Gadiyaram Siddhartha Shankar Das v. G Padmavathi
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court allowed a civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the delay in disposing of an application for leave to file a final decree. The Court directed the trial Court to dispose of the application expediently within six weeks.
What did the court decide?
Direction to the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ongole, to dispose of I.A.No.1390 of 2015 in O.S.No.24 of 1966 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within six weeks.
What the court decided
TH E H ON’BLE SRI J USTICE M.SEETH ARAMA MURTI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 3612 of 20 18
ORDER :
This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed by one of the legal representatives of the preliminary decree holders in O.S.No.24 of 1966 on the file of the Court of the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ongole at Prakasam District.
- I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner at the stage of admission. As this Court is inclined to dispose of the revision at the stage of admission, having regard to the subject matter, no notices are ordered to the respondents, who contested the proceedings before the trial Court.
- I have perused the material record.
- The facts necessary to be stated as a prelude to this order are as under: “The learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ongole, in his order, dated 09.09.2015, passed in I.A.No.200 of 2012 in the afore-stated suit, inter alia observed that the application filed by the petitioner claiming final decree without seeking leave of the Court is not maintainable and, therefore, the same deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, he dismissed the said Interlocutory Application. Therefore, the petitioner
2
filed I.A.No.1390 of 2015 seeking leave to file the final decree proceedings. The present grievance of the petitioner is that though the submissions of the petitioner are already made in the said Interlocutory Application, the learned Judge of the trial Court is simply adjourning the matter and is not disposing of the said interlocutory application.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial Court was justified in adjourning the interlocutory application seeking leave to file final decree proceedings for an extended period.
Whether the High Court should interfere at the admission stage to dispose of the matter by issuing directions to the trial Court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Legal representative of preliminary decree holders
- respondent
Respondents
Coram
M. Seetharama Murti
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRP/3612/2018
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court