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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 379

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Banu - Petitioner
Versus
Poonkodi & Ors. - Respondents
C.R.P. No. 205 of 2023
Decided On : 06-02-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S. Manoj Kumar.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 227 - Petition pending - Issue direction for speedy disposal - Original petition is pending for past more than one and half years and thus, he has chosen to file present civil revision petition for speedy disposal - Held, Every litigant approaching Court of Law is waiting for justice and thus, it must be done in a consistent manner and without discriminating litigants - Therefore issuing directions indiscriminately for speedy disposal of cases by District Judiciary would do no service to cause of justice - Every urgency cannot be considered for issuing a direction for speedy disposal, urgency, which is imminent to be considered - High Court cannot issue such directions for speedy disposal unless there is a justification or acceptable reason for issuing any such directions - Court concerned is expected to regulate its own procedures in respect of cases on Board for effective disposal and to ensure that cases are disposed of within a reasonable period of time - Petition disposed of.

ORDER :

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the Learned District Judge Kancheepuram to dispose the Election Original Petition in No.68 of 2021 on the file of the Learned District Judge Kancheepuram within a time frame fixed by this Court.

The relief sought for in the present civil revision petition is to dispose of the Election Original Petition in O.P.No.68 of 2021 pending on the file of the District Court, Kancheepuram.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that Election Original Petition challenging the panchayat election for the post of Secretary. The original petition instituted in the year 2021 is pending for the past more than one and half years and thus, he has chosen to file the present civil revision petition for speedy disposal.

3. 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 to be granted only on genuine grounds and even in such circumstances, on commencement of trial long adjournments are to be avoided. The reason is to be recorded by the Courts, if it is genuine.

4. Long pendency of litigations causing untold mental agony to the litigants are to be considered by the Courts concerned, while granting adjournments in a routine manner. Any party seeking adjournment on flimsy grounds or attempting to prolong and protract the case, then heavy cost is to be awarded, which is to be paid to the other party, who is ready to conduct the case. If such adjournments are frequently sought for, then exemplary or maximum costs are to be awarded by the Court concerned. The endeavour of the Court is to ensure that the cases are disposed of as expeditiously as possible by avoiding unnecessary adjournments.

5. High Court cannot issue directions to the District Judiciary for speedy disposal of cases in a routine manner. Frequent directions if issued, the same cannot be a practical solution. The trust on the District Judiciary due to overburdening of litigation on Board is to be taken into consideration by the High Court. The routine directions for speedy disposal, if it is issued, it would further cause unnecessary pressure on the District Judiciary. In many such cases, wherein directions are issued, the District Judiciary has come out with administrative letter, seeking extension of time again and again and thus, the purpose for which such directions were issued by the High Court became defeated.

6. The longevity of the litigations are occurring at the instance of the parties on many occasions. The legal brains are adopting tactical approach to prolong and protract the cases for unjust gains and for Forum Shopping. Any party having an idea to achieve their goal in an indirect or illegal manner, then they are adopting all such tactics for the purpose of prolonging the case, which cannot be tolerated by the Courts. On some occasion, if any litigants feel that a particular Judicial Officer in the District Judiciary is inconvenient to them, they are seeking adjournments after adjournments or filing frivolous interlocutory applications through which they all are causing longevity to the litigation. Ill-motives of such litigants if allowed to succeed, then the same will result in miscarriage of justice and thus the Courts are expected to be cautious, while granting unnecessary adjournments on flimsy grounds. All such attempts should be thwarted by the Courts and the Court cannot aid such ill-motive of the parties. The frivolous and unnecessary interlocutory applications are to be dealt with in accordance with law and if the Court formed an opinion that such interlocutory applications are filed with an idea to prolong and protract the issues or filed with ill-motives, then the Court would not hesitate in awarding exemplary or maximum cost on such applications. The cases are to be disposed of in consistent

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 Back to top