Madras High Court
Joshua. J vs Roselin. S on 10 October, 2025
CRP.No.4835 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
CRP.No.4835 of 2025
Joshua. J ... Petitioner
Vs
Roselin. S ... Respondent
Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, to direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Court,
Kanchipuram, to dispose the I.D.O.P. No.93 of 2024 pending on its file
within the prescribed time fix by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Thamizhanban
ORDER
Seeking a direction for the speedy disposal of the I.D.O.P. No.93 of
2024 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Court,
Kanchipuram, the petitioner has preferred the present civil revision petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:04 pm )
2. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would
submit that the revision petitioner / husband filed a divorce petition in
I.D.O.P. No.93 of 2024, on the file of the Family Court, Chennai and
thereafter the respondent / wife had filed a transfer CMP before this Court in
Tr.C.M.P.No.118 of 2024. This Court vide order dated 03.07.2024, had
withdrawn the OP from the Family Court, Chennai, and transferred the same
to the Principal District and Sessions Court, Kanchipuram. Currently the case
is pending before the Hon'ble Principal District and Sessions Court,
Kanchipuram, for further adjudication and disposal and the same is pending
for the past two years without any progress and he prays for speedy disposal
of the I.D.O.P. No.93 of 2024, which is just and necessary.
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:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:04 pm )
“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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:04 pm )
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:
“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.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:04 pm )
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.
6. In view of the same, the Principal District and Sessions Court,
Kanchipuram, is requested to dispose of the case in I.D.O.P. No.93 of 2024
as expeditiously as possible.
With the above observations, this Civil Revision Petition stands
disposed of. No costs.
10.10.2025
mtl
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order : Yes/No
Neutral Case Citation : Yes/No
To
The Principal District and Sessions Court, Kanchipuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:04 pm )
M. JOTHIRAMAN, J.
mtl
10.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:04 pm )
