HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 3691 of 2025

02 January, 2026

Ajeet Uniyal --Petitioner

Versus

Urvashi Uniyal --Respondent ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for

petitioner-husband.

Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

By means of present writ petition under

Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought the indulgence of this Court for a direction to be issued to learned Additional Principal Judge-I, Family Court, Dehradun, to decide and expedite the Original Suit No.1084 of 2022 Sri Ajeet Uniyal Vs. Smt. Urvashi Uniyal, under Section 13 and 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before it, as early as

possible within a stipulated period of four months.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner-husband filed a divorce suit under Section 13 and 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, against the respondent-wife on 03.09.2022 for grant of a decree of dissolution of marriage and also prayed for custody of minor daughter, which was registered as Original Suit No.1084 of 2022 Sri Ajeet Uniyal Vs. Smt. Urvashi Uniyal. The respondent-wife was served with summons in aforesaid Original Suit and the matter

was fixed for filing of written statement/compromise conversation/framing of issue on 29.10.2022. After receiving notices, respondent-wife put in appearance and filed her written statement on 03.12.2022. Learned Family Court sent the parties before the counseling on 03.12.2022 for the purpose of mediation, who after conducted counseling submitted its report, in which it came out that the mediation proceedings failed between the parties because none of them were ready to live with each other.

3. It is further contended by him that after failure of the mediation proceedings, learned Family Court proceeded with the trial and the parties were directed to submit documentary evidences, which was filed from the end of both the parties. Further, during intervening period, petitioner-husband was permitted to meet the children, but the matrimonial dispute could not be settled between the parties. He further submits that matter is being adjourned for one and another reason and the aforesaid suit is pending since 2022 and last two and half years more than 50 dates were fixed by learned Family Court but the controversy could not be settled finally between the parties.

4. The learned counsel for petitioner further submits that the High Court of Uttarakhand has framed “The Uttarakhand Case Flow Management (for Subordinate Courts) Rules, 2009” by exercising its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Under Rule 3 of the aforesaid Rules categorization has been made as Track Nos.1, 2 and 3 of the aforesaid Rules. Rule 3(2) of the Rules provides that the Presiding Officer shall endeavor to dispose-off cases under Track 1 within one year, and under Tracks 2 and 3 within two and three years, respectively, from the date of appearance or deemed appearance of the respondent/defendant (opposite party). The case of the petitioner falls in Track 1 being a matrimonial case and shall be endeavoured to be decided within one year.

5. Apart from this, it is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner-husband that Section 21B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, mandates that matrimonial cases be decided expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of service.

6. Relying upon the above-mentioned Rules and statutory provision, learned counsel for the petitioner-husband submits that an appropriate direction may be issued to the learned Family Court for expeditious disposal of Original Suit No.1084 of

2022 Sri Ajeet Uniyal Vs. Smt. Urvashi Uniyal.

7. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the aforesaid Rules as well as the relevant provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would b