Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Vrinda Vs. Hari Shankar

Vrinda vs Hari Shankar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 19, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/927064

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
C.R.P.Nos.1575 to 1577 of 2012
Subject
Constitution

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

[Constitution of India - Articles 227] Constitution of India - Articles 227 -- Seeking direction to dispose of the Original Petitions bearing O.P.Nos.3574, 4041 and 2969 of 2009 pending on the file of the learned III Additional Family Court, Chennai, these civil revision petitions are focussed.

Key legal issue
Constitution
Acts & sections
Constitution of India - Articles 227

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vrinda

Advocate Mr.K.Sivasubramanian, Adv

Respondent

Hari Shankar

Legal References

Acts
Constitution of India - Articles 227

Excerpt

[constitution of india - articles 227] constitution of india - articles 227 -- seeking direction to dispose of the original petitions bearing o.p.nos.3574, 4041 and 2969 of 2009 pending on the file of the learned iii additional family court, chennai, these civil revision petitions are focussed.civil revision petitions filed under article 227 of the constitution of india to direct the iii additional family court at chennai to dispose of the original petitions bearing o.p.nos.3574, 4041 and 2969 of 2009 pending on its file within a time frame.order1. seeking direction to dispose of the original petitions bearing o.p.nos.3574, 4041 and 2969 of 2009 pending on the file of the learned iii additional family court, chennai, these civil revision petitions are focussed.2. the learned counsel for the revision petitioner in all the three petitions, namely vrinda, would submit that the said vrinda filed two o.ps., namely o.p.no.3574 of 2009 seeking divorce and o.p.no.4041 of 2009 seeking custody of her child.  the  third o.p., so to say, o.p.no.2969 of 2009 was filed by the respondent/hari sankar, for restitution of conjugal rights.   in the o.ps. filed by vrinda, hari sankar - the respondent did not file any counter, even though law contemplates that the entire proceedings should be disposed of expeditiously.  the learned counsel would also submit that counter was filed by vrinda as respondent in the o.p.no.2969 of 2009 filed by hari sankar, the husband.  accordingly, he would pray for giving direction to the family court to dispose of the matter within a time frame.3. i could see considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.4. the object of the special enactment is to see that familial and matrimonial matters are disposed of as expeditiously as possible.  hence, the family court is directed to dispose of the matter by the end of july 2012, if there is no  legal impediment.accordingly, these civil revision petitions are disposed of.  no costs.

Full Judgment

Civil revision petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to direct the III Additional Family Court at Chennai to dispose of the Original Petitions bearing O.P.Nos.3574, 4041 and 2969 of 2009 pending on its file within a time frame.

ORDER

1. Seeking direction to dispose of the Original Petitions bearing O.P.Nos.3574, 4041 and 2969 of 2009 pending on the file of the learned III Additional Family Court, Chennai, these civil revision petitions are focussed.

2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner in all the three petitions, namely Vrinda, would submit that the said Vrinda filed two O.Ps., namely O.P.No.3574 of 2009 seeking divorce and O.P.No.4041 of 2009 seeking custody of her child.  The  third O.P., so to say, O.P.No.2969 of 2009 was filed by the respondent/Hari Sankar, for restitution of conjugal rights.   In the O.Ps. filed by Vrinda, Hari Sankar - the respondent did not file any counter, even though law contemplates that the entire proceedings should be disposed of expeditiously.  The learned counsel would also submit that counter was filed by Vrinda as respondent in the O.P.No.2969 of 2009 filed by Hari Sankar, the husband.  Accordingly, he would pray for giving direction to the Family court to dispose of the matter within a time frame.

3. I could see considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. The object of the special enactment is to see that familial and matrimonial matters are disposed of as expeditiously as possible.  Hence, the Family Court is directed to dispose of the matter by the end of July 2012, if there is no  legal impediment.

Accordingly, these civil revision petitions are disposed of.  No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial