IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA th ON THE 6 OF MAY, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 14786 of 2025 ARPITA ARORA Versus MANOJ ARORA AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Munna Lal Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri A.K. Nirankari - Government Advocate for the State.

ORDER This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief:-

"It is therefore, most humbly prayed that the petition may kindly be allowed and the learned court below may kindly be directed to decide the suit expeditiously. Any other relief may kindly be granted."

2. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that original plaintiff Simran Arora has filed a suit for declaration that the Will purportedly executed by late Shri Harilal and Shri Kishanlal on 05/05/1999 and 04/06/2002 are null and void to the extent of share of petitioner in the property in dispute, for partition by means and points and the mesne profit. It is submitted that the suit was filed on 22/12/2010. More than fourteen and half years have passed, but it is still at the stage of plaintiff evidence. It is submitted that with great Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRINCEE difficulty, issues were framed on 14/02/2022. It is submitted that under these circumstances, the Trial Court may be directed to expeditiously disposal of the suit.

3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner.

4. The Supreme Court in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahbad Vs. State of U.P. and Others decided on 29/02/2024 in SLP (Crl.)

Nos.13284-13289 of 2023 has held as under:-

"32. Therefore, constitutional Courts should not normally fix a time-bound schedule for disposal of cases pending in any Court. The pattern of pendency of various categories of cases pending in every Court, including High Courts, is different. The situation at the grassroots level is better known to the judges of the concerned Courts. Therefore, the issue of giving out-ofturn priority to certain cases should be best left to the concerned Courts. The orders fixing the outer limit for the disposal of cases should be passed only in exceptional circumstances to meet extraordinary situations."

5. Thus, it is clear that constitutional Courts should not direct the district Courts to expedite the hearing, but such a direction can be given in an exceptional circumstance.

6. The only question for consideration is as to whether, this case would fall within the meaning of exceptional circumstance or not?

7. As already pointed out, the suit was filed on 22/12/2010. More than fourteen and half years have passed and even the issues were framed only on

14/02/2022 i.e. after eleven and half years of institution of suit.

8. Under these circumstances, this Court is of considered opinion that Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRINCEE the present suit would certainly fall within the category of exceptional circumstance. Accordingly, the Trial Court is directed to positively dispose of the suit within a period of one year from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that no lengthy adjournment shall be granted.

9. The Trial Court is directed to adhere to the timeline fixed by this Court and shall ensure that the suit is decided within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

10. With aforesaid observation, the petition is finally disposed of.

(G. S. AHLUWALIA)

JUDGE PjS/-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRINCEE