Madras High Court
C.Hariharan vs M.Sowmya on 7 October, 2025
CRP.No.4710 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
CRP.No.4710 of 2025
C.Hariharan ... Petitioner
Versus
M.Sowmya ... Respondent
Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, to fix a time limit for the speedy disposal of H.M.O.P.No.3893 of 2021
on the file of III Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai within a time
frame.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Hariharan
ORDER
Seeking a direction for the speedy disposal of H.M.O.P.No.3893 of
2021 pending on the file of III Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai,
the petitioner has preferred the present civil revision petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/10/2025 01:34:41 pm )
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the respondent is not proceeding with H.M.O.P.No.3893 of 2021 filed by
the respondent for divorce. It is submitted that the petitioner is a permanent
resident of Maharashtra and he has to travel approximately 2400 kms for each
and every hearing and due to tactics adopted by the respondent herein to delay
the proceedings by seeking unnecessary adjournments is causing extreme
inconvenience and hence, prays for speedy disposal of H.M.O.P.No.3893 of
2021.
3. 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
Mad 674, wherein, it has been held in paragraph nos.11 and 12 as follows:
“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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/10/2025 01:34:41 pm )
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.”
4. It is also relevant to cite the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra
reported in 2024 INSC 899, wherein, it has been held as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/10/2025 01:34:41 pm )
“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.”
5. By applying the ratio laid down in the above judgments, fixing a
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/10/2025 01:34:41 pm )
6. In view of the same, the learned III Additional Principal Judge,
Family Court, Chennai, shall dispose of H.M.O.P.No.3893 of 2021 as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three 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.
07.10.2025
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order : Yes/No
Neutral Case Citation : Yes/No
gpa
To
The III Additional Principal Family Court
Chennai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/10/2025 01:34:41 pm )
M. JOTHIRAMAN, J.
gpa
07.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/10/2025 01:34:41 pm )
