Rajasthan High Court: In a writ petition seeking a direction to the Additional District Judge, Chittorgarh, to expedite the hearing of a divorce petition filed in 2020, a single-judge bench of Rekha Borana, J., dismissed the writ petition on noting that the proceedings had not been unduly delayed and refused to issue directions for the expeditious disposal of the divorce petition.
In the instant matter, a divorce petition was initially filed in Family Court, Bikaner, on 17-07-2020. Notices were issued to the respondent the same day. The respondent obtained a stay order from the High Court in a civil transfer application, which resulted in the transfer of the case to the Additional District Judge, Begun Camp Court, District Chittorgarh, on 16-03-2022. The petitioner previously sought an expedited hearing through another writ petition, and this Court had directed expeditious disposal of the case on 30-10-2023.
Issue:
Whether the High Court should direct the Additional District Judge to expedite the disposal of the divorce petition within a specific time frame.
The Court asserted that due to the absence of specific statistics on pendency of cases and disposal rates at the concerned court, passing an order of priority hearing for the petitioner’s case would be inappropriate. The Court held that “no sweeping direction can be passed to decide a particular case on priority.” The Court further noted that the Trial Court’s proceedings had not been delayed inordinately or intentionally and the case had undergone mandatory conciliation proceedings and was scheduled for evidence.
White citing Ali Shad Usmani v. Ali Isteba, 2014 SCC OnLine All 15838, the Court held that granting such relief would unjustly place the petitioner in a preferential category over other litigants, leading to possible resentment and dissatisfaction among those awaiting justice. The Court reiterated that directions for the expeditious disposal of cases should be issued sparingly and only in extraordinary circumstances. It should be left to the discretion of the Trial Court to determine whether urgency is warranted.
The Court dismissed the writ petition on not finding any reason to interfere with the Trial Court’s management of the case and refused to issue directions for the expeditious disposal of the divorce petition. The Court disposed of all pending applications, including the stay petition.
[Yatendra Kumar Sharma v. Swati Sharma, 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 2536, Decided on 22-08-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr.Pankaj Arora, Counsel for the Petitioner
