01Facts
The petitioners sought a direction under Article 227 of the Constitution for the expeditious disposal of a partition suit, originally instituted in 2010 and subsequently renumbered as O.S. No. 438/2023.
¶ 1They submitted that, despite the passage of 16 years, the suit remained at the evidence stage and that the parties’ ages warranted early disposal.
¶ 2The High Court dispensed with notice to the respondents, considering the limited nature of the relief sought.
¶ 302Issues
i.1. Whether the Trial Court should be directed to dispose of O.S. No. 438/2023 expeditiously, given the suit’s age and limited progress.
¶ 1–2, 4ii.2. Whether disposal should be required within a specified outer time limit.
¶ 503Law Applied
The petition invoked Article 227 of the Constitution, under which the High Court exercises supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate courts.
¶ 1The Court’s order applied that jurisdiction to address the unsatisfactory progress of a long-pending suit and to direct its expeditious disposal.
¶ 4–5No statutory provision or precedent was cited in the order.
¶ 1, 4–504Reasoning
The Court noted that the suit had been instituted in 2010, remained at the evidence stage, and involved parties who were aged between 44 and 77 years as of 2010.
¶ 2, 4It found the progress unsatisfactory and identified no compelling reason justifying the delay.
¶ 4Given those circumstances and the limited relief sought, the Court exercised its supervisory jurisdiction to impose a deadline for disposal.
¶ 3–505Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition and directed the Trial Court to dispose of O.S. No. 438/2023 expeditiously, and in any event within 18 months from 28 October 2026.
¶ 5Original Court PDF
M M PURUSHOTTAMAvsM NAGARAJA HEBBAR
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
