Where substantial reliefs in a partition suit are admitted and only a limited issue remains for adjudication, and where personal hardship due to pendency is demonstrated, the High Court, in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction, may direct the Trial Court to dispose of the suit expeditiously within a fixed timeframe, without entering into the merits.

advocatemmmohan

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Section 115 / Article 227 Constitution of India – Direction for early disposal – High Court’s supervisory power – When justified – Where substantial part of reliefs admitted in written statement and only limited issue survives – Direction to dispose within fixed timeframe permissible – Para 3, 4

Partition Suit – Admission of reliefs – Effect – Scope of trial confined to disputed relief – Expediency in adjudication – Para 3

Expeditious Disposal – Senior citizen defendant – Personal hardship – Pendency affecting family obligations – Considered as relevant circumstance for issuing administrative direction – Para 3, 4

---

JUDGMENT

1. Nature of Petition (Para 1)

The Civil Revision Petition was filed seeking a direction to the learned II Additional District Judge, Proddatur, YSR Kadapa District, to dispose of O.S. No.13 of 2024 expeditiously.

---

2. Background of Suit (Para 2)

The respondent/plaintiff instituted O.S. No.13 of 2024 seeking:

(a) Partition of suit schedule item Nos.1 to 3 into two shares in the ratio of 45% to plaintiff and 55% to defendant as per Registered Will dated 03.09.2011.

(b) Partition of suit schedule item Nos.4 and 5 into two equal shares as per Registered Will dated 18.03.2019.

(c) Direction to defendant to pay Rs.9,00,000/- towards means/income from the suit property calculated at Rs.25,000/- per month.

---

3. Submissions (Para 3)

The petitioner/defendant contended:

• Written statement was filed admitting reliefs (a) and (b).

• Only relief (c), relating to income/means from properties, is disputed.

• Suit can be disposed of without elaborate trial.

• Petitioner is a senior citizen aged about 62 years.

• Pendency is affecting marriage arrangements and financial obligations towards daughters.

---

4. Findings and Direction (Para 4)

The High Court, without entering into merits, directed:

• The learned II Additional District Judge, Proddatur to dispose of O.S. No.13 of 2024 expeditiously.

• Preferably within six (6) months from date of receipt of the order.

CRP was disposed of without costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---

ANALYSIS OF FACTS AND LAW

A. Scope of Supervisory Jurisdiction in Delay Matters

Though styled as a Civil Revision Petition, the relief sought was administrative in nature—expeditious disposal.

The High Court exercised supervisory jurisdiction to:

• Prevent undue delay.

• Ensure timely adjudication.

• Facilitate justice in matters involving admitted claims.

Such directions are procedural and do not affect merits.

---

B. Effect of Admission in Written Statement

Where:

• Partition shares under registered Wills are admitted,

• Only mesne profits/income component is disputed,

The scope of trial becomes narrowed.

Under CPC principles:

• Admissions reduce the area of controversy.

• Court may proceed to pass preliminary decree where appropriate.

Thus, the High Court found expeditious disposal feasible.

---

C. Consideration of Personal Hardship

Courts frequently consider:

• Advanced age,

• Financial obligations,

• Matrimonial responsibilities of children,

as equitable factors when directing early disposal.

However:

• Such consideration does not determine merits.

• It only justifies case management intervention.

---

RATIO DECIDENDI

Where substantial reliefs in a partition suit are admitted and only a limited issue remains for adjudication, and where personal hardship due to pendency is demonstrated, the High Court, in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction, may direct the Trial Court to dispose of the suit expeditiously within a fixed timeframe, without entering into the merits.