Disposed

Sri.Raj Kumar Goud alias Raj Kumar Varaganti v. Smt. B.Sowjanya

Telangana HC13 Feb 2026CRP/457/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband sought a direction to the Family Court to expedite disposal of his divorce petition under Sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, which had been repeatedly adjourned since 2022 despite service on the respondent. The High Court directed the Family Court to expedite the trial and dispose of the OP, disposing of the revision petition without costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri.Raj Kumar Goud alias Raj Kumar Varaganti Vs… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶5

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 457 OF 2026

¶6

Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia, praying that in the . circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to allow the present Civil Revision Petition thereby directing the ll Additional Family Court-cum-XV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge at Kalpatharu, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad to adjudicate and drspose of the OP No.1537 of 2022. As well as all lnterlocutory application exepeditiously.

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sri Raj Kumar Goud @ Raj Kumar Varaganti, Sio V,Jagadish, Aged 41 years, Occ. Pvt. Employee, R/o H.No.1-1-1011N'1713, TRC X Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad.

¶9

...Petitioner/ Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

Smt. B.Sowjanya, Wo Raj Kumar Goud @ Raj Kumar Varaganti, Aged 40 years, Occ: House-wife, R/o Flat No.201,2nd Floor, Sai Southern Apartments, Street No.7, New Bakaram, Gandhi Nagar, Hyderabad-500080.

¶12

...RespondenV Respondent

¶13

For the Petitioner : Sri C. Kumar, Advocate

¶14

For the Respondent: None Appeared

¶15

The Court made the following- ORDER

¶16

t,/ /

¶17

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶18

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWARRAO}

¶19

DATE: 13.O2.2O26

¶20

CIVIL REVI SION PETITIO^{N No.457OF2.J26}

¶21

Between:

¶22

Sri Ral Kumar^{(;oJd ({i)} iid]^{Kumar Varaganti}

¶23

... Petitioner/ Petitioner

¶24

AND

¶25

Smt. B. So,vl-^rr,,1

¶26

...Respondent/ Respondent

¶27

ORDER

¶28

fhe^p, es.erri iivil Revision Petition is filed^{aggrievedby the} inaction on thr-i^part of^t-he leat'ned II^{AdditionalFanrily Court-cum-} XV Additional l4etrc'politan Sessions ludge at^{Kalpatharu,Purani} Haveli, Hyderabad. l1 disposing of the suit^{in O.P.No.153l of 2022.}

¶29

Hearcl i.'l'. C, Kumar, learned counsel for the^petitioner Perused the materi:-tl ctt record

¶30

Learncd counsel fcr the^petitioner submitted that^the petitioner orrginalll' filed O.P.No'1537 of 2022 under^Sections 13(1)(ia) and t3(1)(iii) of the l-lindu^{MarriageAct on the file of the} Principal Farniiy^(.c-rrrrt, Hyderabad,^{seeking dissolutionof marriaqe} dated 28.03.2019. The^{respondentfiled her counter affidaviton}

¶31

¶32

¶33

21.04.2023 raising allegations, to which the petitioner filed a

¶34

detailed reply denying the same, and on the basis of the pleadings, points were framed for consideration

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that, at the request of the petitioner, the OP was transferred to the learned II Additional Family Court-cum-XV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge at Kalpatharu, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad, as the then Presiding Officer of the Principal Family Court was the sister of the petitioner's counsel. After transfer, the petitioner furnished the respondent's address and filed his chief affidavit as PW 1 on 24 .O7 .2024.

¶36

,The Court sent the notice to the respondent. Though notice was served on her, she was called absent on 04.06.2025 The matter has been repeatedly adjourned without conclusion of trial.

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the interlocutory application filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC seeking correction of the petitioner's name in the cause title from "Sri Raj Kumar Goud" to "Raj Kumar Goud @ Raj Kumar Varaganti" and the same has been posted along with the main case on 19.01.2026.

¶38

7, Learned counsel for the^petitioner further submits that^the OP has been^pending since 2022, and^{prayed to allow the CRP.}

¶39

In view of the: above submissions made by the learned counsel lor the^petitioner, the learned II Additional Family Courtcum-XV Additional lvletropolitan Sessions ludge at^Kalpatharu, Purani Haveli, llyder.abad, is directed to expedite the trial and dispose of the O.P.No.1537 of 2022 as expeditiously as^possible.

¶40

With the abo,re direction, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There snall be no order as to costs.

¶41

As a sequcl, rn scellaneous applications^pending, if any, in this

¶42

Civil Rcvrsiorl Pe titicr'r, shall stand closed.

¶43

SD/- A.SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

,TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

.1 The ll Additional F;:mily Court-cum-XV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge at Kalpatharu, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad

¶50

One CC to Sri C. Kumar Advocate [OPUC]

¶51

Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED.l 3t02t2026

ORDER

CRP No 457 ot 2026

R Til s 't-4
(
it *
.)
-)
,t-
2 1 r{q 202
rt+
.)*.\rot
..-\ IP.il ,- r-f .:O
:-4"

¶59

CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS DISPOSED OF, NO COSTS

¶60

tr
2[

Sri.Raj Kumar Goud alias Raj Kumar Varaganti v. Smt. B.Sowjanya

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri.Raj Kumar Goud alias Raj Kumar Varaganti v. Smt. B.Sowjanya

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Srinivas Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. M. Pushpal Reddy Vs M/s. Pushpanjali Engineering works

K.Ravinder Reddy Vs Sri Sandeep Kumar Sultania, Ias,.

Dodla Neeraja Vs M/s. Sri Ram Raghavendra Chits (P) Ltd.

Alahari Venkata Rajagopal Vs Kalakota Venkatrama Narsimha Chary

Nalam Ashok Vs M/s. Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd.