SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 323

S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
R. Asokan – Appellant
Versus
A. Latha – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mrs. Raj Genevive Veena

ORDER :

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the Presiding Officer, I Additional Family Court, Chennai to dispose off and pass order in O.P.No.1423 of 2016.

The Civil Revision Petition is filed for speedy disposal of the O.P.No.1423 of 2016.

2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 04.12.1994 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. Due to misunderstanding, the petitioner and the respondent are living separately. The petitioner filed H.M.O.P.No.1423 of 2016 for Divorce on the file of the I Additional Family Court at Chennai.

3. The grievance of the revision petitioner is that the respondent is trying to prolong the case for adverse benefit. Hence, the H.M.O.P filed by the petitioner is kept pending and the respondent / wife seeking longer adjournment after adjournment to prolong and protract the matter. Thus, the petitioner is constrained to move the present Civil Revision Petition.

4. Unnecessary adjournments on flimsy grounds would cause prejudice to the parties to the litigation. Rule is to conduct the case on the date it is posted for hearing. Adjournment is an exception. Thus, adjournments are t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top