Madras High Court
A.S.Chellakumar vs Chandrammal on 17 October, 2025
CRP.No.5091 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
CRP.No.5091 of 2025
A.S.Chellakumar ... Petitioner
Versus
1.Chandrammal
2.Poosa
3.Rathinammal
4.G.Wesley
5.Kumar
6.W.Titus Thiagarajan
7.W.Jonnes
8.The Tahsildar,
Uthukottai Taluk,
Tiruvallur. ... Respondents
Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, to grant an order or direction to expedite the proceedings in O.S.No.205
of 2007 pending on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Uthukottai, in a time bound manner fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Murugendran
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 11:40:43 am )
CRP.No.5091 of 2025
ORDER
Seeking a direction for the speedy disposal of the suit in O.S.No.205 of
2007 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Uthukottai,
the petitioner has preferred the present civil revision petition.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the petitioner is 59 years old senior citizen suffering immense hardship,
mental agony, and financial strain due to the protracted litigation. Though
the said suit is of the year 2007 and more than eighteen years have been
lapsed, he prays for speedy disposal of the suit in O.S.No.205 of 2007 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 11:40:43 am )
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 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 11:40:43 am )
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.”
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 11:40:43 am )
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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Uthukottai, is requested to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.205 of 2007 as
expeditiously as possible.
With the above observations, this Civil Revision Petition stands
disposed of. No costs.
12.09.2025
mtl
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order : Yes/No
Neutral Case Citation : Yes/No
To
The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Uthukottai.
M. JOTHIRAMAN, J.
mtl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 11:40:43 am )
17.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 11:40:43 am )
