✦ Madras High Court

Renuka v. Gowrammal2. N.Boopathi3. Yuvarani4. Babu

PRINCIPAL SUBORDINATE, MSTTOTHE PRINCIPAL SUBORDINATE2 min read

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. At this juncture, it is worthwhile to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in W.P.No.587/2023, dated10.11.2023, in Shaikh Uzma Feroz Hussain Vs. The State of Maharastra has dismissed the writ petition, by observing as follows. We are of the view that since every High…
  • Para 66. With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs.19.02.2024Index: Yes/NoInternet: Yes/No mstToThe Principal Subordinate Judge, Hosur. Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crp No.172 of 2024V.SIVAGNANAM , J. mstCRP No.172 of 202419.02.2024Page 4 of 4

Judgment

Crp No.172 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated 19.02.2024CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAMCRP No.172 of 2024 Renuka ... PetitionerVs.

1.

Gowrammal2. N.Boopathi3. Yuvarani4. Babu ... RespondentsPrayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to direct the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Hosur to dispose of the O.S.No.347/2022, within a stipulated time frame as fixed by this Court. For Petitioner: Mr. C.PrakasamORDERThis Civil Revision Petition has been filed to direct the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Hosur to dispose of the O.S.No.347/2022, within a stipulated time frame as fixed by this Court.

2.

On perusal of the records, it shows that the petitioner herein is the Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crp No.172 of 2024plaintiff and she has filed the above suit against the respondents/defendants seeking partition. Pending suit, the respondents/defendants have entered into a sale agreement with the third party for selling the property. Hence, the petitioner has filed I.A.No.2/2022 seeking temporary injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from creating any encumbrance on the suit property. However, the learned Trial Judge has not passed any order in the above application, on the other hand, the respondents are taking steps to execute the sale deed. In such circumstances, the petitioner sought direction of this court to the Trial Judge for speedy disposal of the case within a time frame.

3.

At this juncture, it is worthwhile to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in W.P.No.587/2023, dated10.11.2023, in Shaikh Uzma Feroz Hussain Vs. The State of Maharastra has dismissed the writ petition, by observing as follows.

We are of the view that since every High Court and every Court in the country has a huge pendency, the Constitutional Court should avoid temptation of fixing a time-bound schedule for disposal of any case, before any court, unless the situation is extra ordinary.

4.

Further, pursuant to the direction of this Court, the Registry, on verification through e-filing, has reported that the total pendency of the Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crp No.172 of 2024cases in the above Court is 916.

5.

Considering the pendency of the cases and also taking note of the fact that the suit is filed for partition and in the meantime, the petitioner is on fear that the respondents are taking steps to sell the suit property to the third party, the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Hosur is directed to dispose of the I.A.No.2/2022, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, dispose the main suit, as early as possible.

Operative part

6.

With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs.19.02.2024Index: Yes/NoInternet: Yes/No mstToThe Principal Subordinate Judge, Hosur. Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crp No.172 of 2024V.SIVAGNANAM , J. mstCRP No.172 of 202419.02.2024Page 4 of 4

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Constitution of India — art. 227.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Madras High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments