Madras High Court
B.Suresh Khanna vs K. Anand on 13 October, 2025
C.R.P.No.4924 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
C.R.P.No.4924 of 2025
B.Suresh Khanna
... Petitioner / Petitioner / Applicant / Third Party
Versus
1. K. Anand
... 1st Respondent / Respondent / Petitioner / Plaintiff
2. S.David Padmanabhan
... 2nd Respondent / Respondent / Respondent / Defendant
Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 227 of Constitution of
India, to issue appropriate direction directing the learned Principal District
Judge, Namakkal to decide I.A.No.9 of 2025 in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in
O.S.No.91 of 2021 in a time bound manner.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramesh
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 08:42:03 pm )
C.R.P.No.4924 of 2025
ORDER
Seeking a direction for the speedy disposal of the case in I.A.No.9 of
2025 in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in O.S.No.91 of 2021 on the file of learned
Principal District Judge, Namakkal, the petitioner has preferred the present
civil revision petition.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
the first respondent herein filed a suit in O.S.No.91 of 2021 on the file for the
Principal District Judge, Namakkal seeking recovery of a sum of
Rs.11,35,000/-, claiming that the second respondent had borrowed the
amount solely from him. In the said suit, the first respondent filed I.A.No.2
of 2021 for attaching the property in question, and the same was granted on
28.07.2025. The petitioner herein, upon becoming aware of this order,
immediately filed an application in I.A.No.9 of 2025 to lift the attachment.
The respondents have been delaying the application with ulterior motives.
The first respondent filed a counter in the said application, and to date, the
application to lift the attachment has not been decided, causing great hardship
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 08:42:03 pm )
and irreparable loss to the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that the speedy
disposal of I.A.No.9 of 2025 in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in O.S.No.91 of 2021 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:
“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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 08:42:03 pm )
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:
“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:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 08:42:03 pm )
“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.
6. In view of the same, the learned learned Principal District Judge,
Namakkal, is requested to dispose of the case in I.A.No.9 of 2025 in
I.A.No.2 of 2021 in O.S.No.91 of 2021 as expeditiously as possible.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 08:42:03 pm )
7. With the above observations, this Civil Revision Petition stands
disposed of. No costs.
13.10.2025
av
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order : Yes/No
Neutral Case Citation : Yes/No
To
The learned Principal District Judge, Namakkal.
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 08:42:03 pm )
av
13.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 08:42:03 pm )
