Mallika and Others vs V. Ashok Kumar

C.S. Karnan, J.—The revision Petitioners/Defendants have filed the above revision to direct the learned Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur to dispose of the suit in O.S. No. 21 of 2011 on his file at an early date.

The short facts of the case are as follows:

The Respondent/Plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S. No. 21 of 2011 against the revision Petitioners/Defendants for a preliminary decree to divide the schedule of properties by metes and bounds and allot 1/3rd share to the Plaintiff and handover the separate possession. In the said suit, the Defendants have filed a written statement and resisted the suit on various grounds.

Under this circumstances, the revision Petitioners/Defendants have filed the above revision for direction to the learned Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur to dispose of the partition suit in O.S. No. 21 of 2011 on the file of the above said Court.

The Learned Counsel for the revision Petitioners argued that the Defendants are willing to share the property but the Respondent has not co-operated for speedy trial. The revision Petitioners have filed written statement. After filing the written statement, the learned Judge has adjourned the suit from time to time. Even then the parties are ready to settle the issues raised in the plaint. The Defendants have come from a poor family. Hence, the Learned Counsel has sought speedy disposal of the suit.

The Learned Counsel for the Respondent argued that the partition suit has been filed in the year 2011. So far, issues have been framed. Now, the learned Judge is hearing the cases listed in the year 2008, and as such the present case can only be heard after considerable lapse of time. If this Court gives direction for disposal of the case within a stipulated period, the direction cannot be complied with as several backlog of cases are pending on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur. The Learned Counsel has strongly objected for allowing the civil revision petition.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the Learned Counsels on either side and on considering the poor economic status of the revision Petitioners and also considering that the 1st Defendant is a senior citizen and an aged widow, this Court is inclined to give direction to the learned Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur to dispose of the case in O.S. No. 21 of 2011, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order, after giving sufficient opportunities to the parties concerned. Accordingly ordered.

In the result, the above revision petition is disposed of with the above observation. There is No. order as to costs.