Telangana High Court

Sri.Pola Sai Kumar vs Smt. Gunda Vaishnavi on 9 February, 2024

Author: T. Vinod Kumar

Bench: T. Vinod Kumar

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

        CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 330 of 2024

ORDER:

1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed seeking a direction for

early disposal of F.C.O.P.No.272 of 2022 (Old F.C.O.P.No. 346 of

2019) before the Additional District & Sessions Judge - cum - II

Additional Family Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, at Medchal

2. Heard Sri. J Venudhar Reddy, learned Counsel for the

petitioner and perused the record.

3. The petitioner (husband) herein had filed the underlying OP

under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995 seeking

divorce from the respondent.

4. The petitioner herein submits that even after the lapse of four

(4) years from the date of institution and though the petitioner

herein had filed his evidence affidavit on 09.09.2021, the

underlying OP is still at the stage of trial by virtue of the

respondent employing delay tactics; and that the Trial Court was

duty bound to conduct day-to-day trial to ensure speedy disposal. It

is further submitted that the prolonged litigation is causing the

petitioner mental agony; and that the same is also diminishing his

future prospects. He therefore prays for a direction to the Trial

Court for early disposal of the main OP.

5. I have taken note of the submissions made.

6. A perusal of the record indicates that several adjournments

were granted at the behest of both the petitioner and the respondent

herein. That apart, though the petitioner had contended that his

evidence is still pending as the respondent is purposefully dragging

the matter, it appears from the record that the petitioner herein had

filed an interlocutory application for receiving documents on

03.08.2023 and the matter is now being heard on the said

interlocutory application. Therefore, this Court is reluctant to

accept the contention of the petitioner that delay in disposal of the

matter is entirely on account of the respondent.

7. Further, it is of consequence to note that such interdicting

directions to the Trial Courts often interfere and cause damage to

their regular exercise of judicial work, in turn translating to

acceleration of judicial delays. Therefore, unless a case genuinely

warrants such directions, the practice of casually approaching this

Court with a relief for speedy disposal ought to be deprecated.

8. However, it is beneficial to note that the scheme of the Code

of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the Code, 1908') fixes several

procedural timelines to ensure timely delivery of justice, more

particularly with regard to conducting trial on a day-to-day basis.

Therefore, this Court is of the view that the Trial Court ought to

have kept in mind the scheme of the Code, 1908 while granting

adjournments.

9. It is imperative to remember that the wheels of justice can

only turn smoothly when all the stakeholders function responsibly.

The Supreme Court in Yashpal Jain Vs. Sushila Devi and Ors 1,

taking a note of the rampant delay in disposal of cases has

formulated certain direction for timely adjudication. The said

directions are as under:

"42. The following directions are issued:

i. All courts at district and taluka levels shall ensure proper execution of the summons and in a time bound manner as prescribed Under Order V Rule (2) of Code of Civil Procedure and same shall be monitored by Principal District Judges and after collating the statistics they shall forward the same to be

2023/INSC/948 : MANU/SC/1184/2023

placed before the committee constituted by the High Court for its consideration and monitoring.

ii. All courts at District and Taluka level shall ensure that written statement is filed within the prescribed limit namely as prescribed Under Order VIII Rule 1 and preferably within 30 days and to assign reasons in writing as to why the time limit is being extended beyond 30 days as indicated under proviso to Sub- rule (1) of Order VIII of Code of Civil Procedure. iii. All courts at Districts and Talukas shall ensure after the pleadings are complete, the parties should be called upon to appear on the day fixed as indicated in Order X and record the admissions and denials and the court shall direct the parties to the suit to opt for either mode of the settlement outside the court as specified in Sub-section (1) of Section 89 and at the option of the parties shall fix the date of appearance before such forum or authority and in the event of the parties opting to any one of the modes of settlement directions be issued to appear on the date, time and venue fixed and the parties shall so appear before such authority/forum without any further notice at such designated place and time and it shall also be made clear in the reference order that trial is fixed beyond the period of two months making it clear that in the event of ADR not being fruitful, the trial would commence on the next day so fixed and would proceed on day-to-day basis.

iv. In the event of the party's failure to opt for ADR namely resolution of dispute as prescribed Under Section 89(1) the court should frame the issues for its determination within one week preferably, in the open court. v. Fixing of the date of trial shall be in consultation with the learned Advocates appearing for the parties to enable them to adjust their calendar. Once the date of trial is fixed, the trial should proceed accordingly to the extent possible, on day-to-day basis.

vi. Learned trial judges of District and Taluka Courts shall as far as possible maintain the diary for ensuring that only such number of cases as can be handled on any given day for trial and complete the recording of evidence so as to avoid overcrowding of the cases and as a sequence of it would result in adjournment being sought and thereby preventing any inconvenience being caused to the stakeholders.

vii. The counsels representing the parties may be enlightened of the provisions of Order XI and Order XII so as to narrow down the scope of dispute and it would be also the onerous responsibility of the Bar Associations and Bar Councils to have periodical refresher courses and preferably by virtual mode.

viii. The trial courts shall scrupulously, meticulously and without fail comply with the provisions of Rule 1 of Order XVII and once the trial has commenced it shall be proceeded from day to day as contemplated under the proviso to Rule (2).

ix. The courts shall give meaningful effect to the provisions for payment of cost for ensuring that no adjournment is sought for procrastination of

the litigation and the opposite party is suitably compensated in the event of such adjournment is being granted.

x. At conclusion of trial the oral arguments shall be heard immediately and continuously and judgment be pronounced within the period stipulated Under Order XX of Code of Civil Procedure.

xi. The statistics relating to the cases pending in each court beyond 5 years shall be forwarded by every presiding officer to the Principal District Judge once in a month who (Principal District Judge/District Judge) shall collate the same and forward it to the review committee constituted by the respective High Courts for enabling it to take further steps. xii. The Committee so constituted by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the respective States shall meet at least once in two months and direct such corrective measures to be taken by concerned court as deemed fit and shall also monitor the old cases (preferably which are pending for more than 05 years) constantly. It is also made clear that further directions for implementation of the above directions would be issued from time to time, if necessary, and as may be directed by this Court.

43. The Secretary General is directed to circulate the copy of this judgment to the Registrar General of all the High Courts for being placed before the respective Chief Justices for a consideration and suitable steps being taken as opined herein above."

(emphasis supplied)

10. Therefore, this Court is of the view that it is appropriate to

direct the Trial Court to proceed with the matter in an expeditious

manner keeping in view the aforesaid direction of the Apex Court.

It is needless to state that the direction to conduct trial on a day to

day basis should be read in light of the directions No. (v), (vi) and

(viii); and any plea of adjournment sought for by the parties shall

be decided in the light of Order 17 Rule (1) of the Code, 1908 read

with direction No. (ix) issued by the Apex Court in Yashpal Jain's

case (supra).

11. Accordingly, the present Civil Revision Petition is disposed

of subject to the above observations.