Court No. - 42
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4597 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ajit Kumar Pandey Respondent :- District And Session Judge District Allahabad And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravindra Nath Yadav,Abhishek Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
The instant application has been filed to expedite the matrimonial suit no.356 of 2016 (Ajit Kumar Pandey v. Smt. Dipti Pandey) under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, pending in the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Allahabad.
Sri Ravindra Nath Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is already paying the maintenance granted under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the learned trial court. The maintenance is being paid to the respondent No.3 on a regular basis and without any default on the part of the petitioner. The only prayer made by the learned counsel for he petitioner is that the suit proceedings may be decided within a stipulated period of time.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also calls attention to the order-sheet. The respondent No.3 entered appearance in the suit by filing a written statement on 26.08.2016. The issues were framed on 29.08.2017.
I see merit in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Unnecessary delay in the proceedings under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 can cause irreparable damage to the parties which cannot be compensated in terms of the money. The proceedings have to be decided on their merits within a stipulated period of time.
The respondent No.2-learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Allahabad is directed to decide the Matrimonial Suit No.356 of 2016 (Ajit Kumar Pandey v. Smt. Dipti Pandey) within a period of one year. The court shall not grant any unnecessary adjournment to the parties in the matter. Both the parties are directed to cooperate with the learned trial court to bring the proceedings expeditiously. In case any adjournment is granted, the learned trial court shall do so after imposing exemplary costs upon the parties seeking such adjournment.
If required, the learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing of the suit on day to day basis to ensure that the aforesaid timeline for deciding the suit is adhered to.
It is clarified that since this order is being passed in the absence of the respondent no.3, it is open to the respondent no.3 to seek the recall of the order in case incorrect facts have been stated by the petitioner.
With the aforesaid direction, the petition is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 Ashish Tripathi