Full Judgment Text
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.5392 OF 2016
(Arising out of SLP (C)No.16083 of 2016 @ of
CC No.9059 of 2016)
RAM VENUPRASAD APPELLANT
VERSUS
SHILPA PILLAI RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN,J.
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appellant is aggrieved since the Third
Additional Family Court, Chennai was not taking steps to
dispose of his case in spite of the direction of the High
Court in the judgment dated 29.06.2015 to dispose of the
case within a period of three months. When the matter
came up before this Court, the following order was
passed:
JUDGMENT
“It is seen from the impugned Judgment that the
High Court had directed the Third Additional
Family Court, Chennai, to dispose of H.M.O.P. No.
1606 of 2014 within a period of three months from
the date of the impugned Judgment. The impugned
Judgment was delivered on 29.06.2015.
It is reported that even after almost an year, the
said case is not likely to be disposed of.
The Registry is directed to call for a report from
the Third Additional Family Court, Chennai, as to
what is the reason for not disposing of the above
referred case within the time g ranted by the High
Court. The report should reach before this Court
within four weeks from today.
Post the matter along with the report on
29.06.2016.“
1
Page 1
4. The Third Additional Family Court, Chennai has
forwarded a report dated 30.05.2016 to this Court stating
therein that only because of the non-cooperation on the
part of the respondent/wife, the disposal of the case was
delayed. Now, respondent/wife has filed her counter
affidavit. The Family Court has also reported that the
case will be taken up on a day-to-day basis and the same
will be disposed of expeditiously. We are informed that
th
the matter now stands posted to 12 July, 2016. We
direct the Third Additional Family Court, Chennai to
conduct the trial on day-to-day basis and dispose of
H.M.O.P. No. 1606 of 2014 on or before 31.08.2016. The
appellant is directed to produce the copy of the judgment
before the Family Court.
5. The appeal is disposed of with no order as to
costs.
.................J.
[KURIAN JOSEPH]
JUDGMENT
....................J.
[ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]
NEW DELHI;
JUNE 29,2016
2
Page 2
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.11 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C).......... of 2016
(CC No.9059/2016)
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29/06/2015
in CMA No. 833/2015 passed by the High Court of Madras)
RAM VENUPRASAD Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SHILPA PILLAI Respondent(s)
(with c/delay in filing SLP)
Date : 29/06/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Supriya Juneja, Adv.
Mr. Anoopam Prasad, Adv.
Ms. Gargi Khanna,Adv.
Ms. Mehaak Jaggi, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
JUDGMENT
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of signed
non-reportable judgment.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
(Rajni Mukhi) (Chander Bala)
SR. P.A. COURT MASTER
(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)
3
Page 3