NATASHA OZA Vs. KUMAR RANGANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner/wife has filed these civil revision petitions praying this Court to issue a direction to the First Additional Family Court at Chennai to dispose of cases viz., O.P.No.1508 of 2006, G.W.O.P.No.2744 of 2006, M.C.No.165 of 2007 and O.P.No.1056 of 2007 pending on its file respectively within a period of two months or such other period determined by this Court.

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner/wife submits that O.P.No.1508 of 2006 has been filed by the petitioner herein before the First Additional Family Court at Chennai praying for dissolution of the marriage dated 19.4.1991 which has taken place between herself and the respondent/husband and that the conciliation proceedings have been completed and that the original petition has been posted for filing of proof affidavit on 11.11.2008 and that the matter is pending for nearly three years and the same has not been disposed of and further that the respondent/husband has filed originally a petition in O.P.No.139 of 2006 on the file of this Court for custody of the only minor child Anasuya and on 28.11.2006, this Court has passed an interim order requiring the parties to negotiate the settlement in respect of matrimonial matters and in regard to the minor child and further that the compromise talks has not taken place and later the O.P.No.139 of 2006 has been transferred to the file of the First Additional Family Court at Chennai on the revision petitioner filing a transfer application and that subsequently, the same has been re-numbered as O.P.No.1056 of 2007 on the file of the First Additional Family Court at Chennai and that these matters require early disposal, since all the proceedings between the parties are ripe for joint trial and therefore in the interest of justice, these revision petitions are to be allowed by this Court by directing the trial Court to dispose of the aforesaid cases within a reasonable time fixed by this Court.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the respondent/husband from January 2008 till March 2008, there has been no Judge in the First Additional Family Court at Chennai and then in four weeks there has been a Judge and from April 2008 till October 2008, there has been no Judge in the First Additional Family Court at Chennai and that when the case came up before the Second Additional Judge(in charge)Family Court at Chennai in respect of the First Additional Family Court at Chennai, posted the matters for enquiry on 17.10.2008 and 2004 cases are posted in the list and some of the cases of the year 2005 are also coming up in the list and when this is the position, what is an extraordinary urgency in these cases to take up the same out of turn and the matter has been posted for enquiry only and nothing has been stated in regard to the filing of proof affidavit and that the revision petitioner/wife has filed a divorce petition in USA against the respondent/husband in the year 2001 -2002 and the same has been withdrawn and after that the parties lived together for four years and that the child has been brought to India and for visiting rights, the respondent/husband has to file a petition against the revision petitioner/wife and that the respondent/husband has taken a house in Madras on rent and he is coming on every Saturday in a week and for seven months, he has not seen the child and the expedite disposal is not for the main case but also for the Application No.4726 of 2006 filed by the respondent/husband in respect of visiting rights and that from June 2009, four months time may be granted by this Court to the trial Court to dispose of the said cases pending between the parties.