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

2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 2509

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J
ARJUN RAVIKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
K MOHANAN CHANDRAN NAIR – Respondent
OP (CIVIL) 2723/2016



The court asserted its jurisdiction under Article 227 to ensure timely justice, particularly for senior citizens, highlighting the priority in case resolutions.

Headnote:

Intervention - Article 227 - Act Section List: [Constitution of India, Article 227] - The court directed expedited disposal of a pending partition suit, emphasizing the need for priority consideration of cases involving senior citizens and facilitating a timely resolution.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought the court's intervention for the speedy disposal of their pending partition suit OS.961/2015, which had faced delays in the Second Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

Issues: Whether the court should intervene to expedite the disposal of the partition suit pending in the Second Additional Munsiff Court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for timely justice, especially in cases involving senior citizens, and exercised its authority under Article 227 to direct the lower court to expedite proceedings.

Final Decision: Court directed expedited disposal of OS.No.961/2015 within nine months.

JUDGMENT

This is a petition filed by the petitioners seeking intervention of this court for speedy disposal of OS.No.961/2015 pending before the Second Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram under Article 227 of the Constitution of India .

2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioners are the plaintiffs in Ext.P1 suit OS.961/2015 pending before the Second Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The suit was filed for partition. The petitioners have also filed an application for interim injunction evidenced by Ext.P2 as IA.No.1503/2016. The respondent filed Ext.P3 written statement. The steps are complete. The matter was referred for mediation, but it was not settled in the mediation. So they have no other option except seeking the following relief:

“To direct the Hon'ble Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram to dispose of Ext.P1 suit as expeditiously as possible, within a time frame”.

3. Considering the nature of relief claimed, this court felt that the petition can be disposed of after getting a report from the concerned court regarding the present stage of the case and time required for disposal of the case and accordingly a report has been called for and the Second Additional Munsiff, Thiruvananthapuram has sent a report which reads as follows:

“xxxx xxxx. I am holding only the additional charge of this court and as per the order of the Honourable High Court, one day sitting in this court is being conducted on the last working day of every week. There are so may time limit cases pending in this Court as well as in the Additional Munsiff's Court-III. The O.P.(Election) petition of this Court are also transferred to my Court for speedy disposal. Since this suit is of the year 2015 it is also not included in the target.

In the circumstances, I most humbly request that nine months time may kindly be granted to dispose of the matter.”

4. Heard Sri.D. Sajeev, counsel appearing for the petitioners and perused the report.

5. It is seen from the report that there is no regular Munsiff for the Second Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuarm and the Third Additional Munsiff is in charge of that court. It is also seen from the report that some of the election petitions were also transferred to that court for speedy disposal and much older cases than this case are pending before that court. However the Munsiff has expressed his willingness to dispose of the case within nine months. It is seen from the petition that petitioners 1 and 2 are senior citizens aged 71 and 80 years and the respondent is also a senior citizen and some priority must be given for disposal of the cases involving senior citizens. So considering the circumstances, this court feels that the petition can be disposed of as follows:

The Third Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram is directed to expedite the disposal of OS.No.961/2015 pending before the Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within nine months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment as undertaken in the report.

Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this judgment to the court below at the earliest.

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