ORDER :

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the Learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Villupuram, to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.146 of 2015 within the stipulated period.

The Civil Revision Petition has been filed to direct the Learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Villupuram, to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.146 of 2015 within the stipulated period.

2. The grievance of the revision petitioner is that the Suit instituted by him for specific performance is pending for the past about 7 years and longevity of the Suit increased on account of unnecessary adjournments granted by the Court on flimsy grounds.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner lamented by stating that despite his efforts he is unable to dispose of the Suit and it is periodically adjourned at every stage at the instance of the respondent. Thus, the petitioner is forced to move the High Court seeking a direction for speedy disposal.

4. High Court is not expected to issue any such direction for speedy disposal of cases in a routine manner. Several such cases are pending before the District Judiciary. All such cases are also to be disposed of consistently and in uniform manner without causing any discrimination amongst the litigants. Several litigants are longing to get justice from various Courts and therefore, merely issuing a direction in one case High Court cannot discriminate the litigants and it is for the Court concerned to regulate its own proceedings in respect of the disposal of the cases on its board.

5. No doubt priority is to be given in respect of the senior citizen cases and for the cases, where there is an imminent urgency, which must be established by the parties concerned. In respect of all other cases, the Court concerned has to dispose of the same consistently by avoiding unnecessary adjournments on flimsy grounds. Adjournments are exceptions. Rule is to conduct the cases, whenever it is posted for hearing. No party can be allowed to take adjournment in a casual manner. Adjournments on genuine grounds are to be granted only by recording reason. Then alone the Court can form an opinion, whether, the adjournments are obtained sensibly or insensibly.

6. Filing the Interlocutory Applications repeatedly with an ill-motive to prolong and protract the proceedings are to be thwarted. Such applications are to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and if it is found frivolous, then maximum cost is to be imposed. There cannot be any leniency in dealing with frivolous applications by the Courts. Parties cannot be allowed to achieve their ill-motives by abusing the process of Court or by taking undue advantage of the procedures contemplated under the Code of Civil Procedure or under the Statutes or Rules concerned.

7. In this regard, leniency by the Courts, undoubtedly, would cause prejudice to any one of the parties to the litigation and that is to be construed as an injustice to the parties. Therefore, adjournment on flimsy grounds would cause injustice to the parties. Thus, the Court concerned, while granting adjournments are expected to borne in mind that such adjournments are to be granted by recording reasons and on genuine grounds but not otherwise.

8. Long adjournments are to be avoided. In the present case, the petitioner pleads that the Suit is pending for the past about 7 years. Mere length of time alone is not the criteria. The number of cases pending on board in a particular Court is to be taken into consideration by the High Court. That exactly is the reason why this Court has repeatedly held that the Court concerned is the best person to regulate its own proceedings on board and ensure that the cases are disposed of in a consistent manner so as to avoid unnecessary filing of such civil revision petition before the High Court seeking speedy disposal of the cases.

9. High Court cannot issue directions to the District Judiciary for speedy disposal of cases in a routine manner. F