Married in 2008, fighting court cases since 2010, these couple are at the first run / starting stage of the battle, i.e. they are at the Family court. It has taken four years from 2010 to 2014 for the case to reach “order” stage, but NO decree has been passed till 2016 (i.e.) for two years. So the parties reach the Madras HC !! One of the reasons cited by the counsel for the petitioner is that the judge is continuously on leave ! So, Hon Madras HC says ok finish the case in 2 more months ! God know when this case will be ordered and when the parties will put an end to their fights, because should one of the parties proceed on appeal to the HC that may take another 5 to 7 years !!
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.01.2016
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA
CRP [PD] No.45 of 2016
R.Preetha .. Petitioner
Udayarajan .. Respondent
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue direction to the I Additional Family Court, Chennai to pass orders on O.P.No.200 of 2010 within a stipulated time fixed by this Hon’ble Court.
For Petitioner : Ms.Arulmozhi
The petitioner has filed OP.No.200/2010 under section 13[ia] and section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for dissolution of the marriage solemnised on 30.11.2008 on the ground of cruelty and to direct the respondent herein to pay permanent alimony of Rs.20 lakhs to her. Resisting the allegations made in OP.No.200/2010, the respondent has filed his counter affidavit and he has also filed OP.No.3035/2011 under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. Both the petitions were tried jointly on the file of the learned I Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai and the same were posted for orders on 29.04.2014. But, as on date, the orders are yet to be pronounced. Hence, the present Civil Revision Petition at the instance of the petitioner.
2 Since the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of at the admission stage as the prayer sought for by the petitioner is limited in nature, notice to the respondent is hereby dispensed with.
3 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Presiding Officer, I Additional Family Court, Chennai is on continuous leave and that the Presiding Officer, II Additional Family Court, Chennai is in-charge and hence, suitable direction may be given to the Presiding Officer concerned for earlier disposal of OP.Nos.200/2010 and 3035/2011.
4 Considering the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perusal of the typed set of papers, this Court is of the view that the relief sought for by the petitioner is limited in nature and it is fit case to direct the Court concerned to dispose of the petitions in OP.Nos.200/2010 and 3035/2011 as expeditiously as possible.
5 Accordingly, the learned I Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai or the Presiding Officer [In-charge] of the said Court, is directed to dispose of the cases in OP.Nos.200/2010 and 3035/2011 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving fair opportunity to both sides.
6 The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.
12.01.2016 AP To
1.The I Additional Judge Family Court, Chennai.
AP CRP [PD] No.45/2016 12.01.2016