HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6924 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Akhil Anand, the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. 2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has erroneously impleaded the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ayodhya and he orally requested for being permitted to strike out the name of the court from the array of parties. The request is accepted and the learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to carry out the requisite correction in the array of parties forthwith. 3. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has sought issuance of a direction to the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ayodhya to decide the Suit No.59 of 2024: Madhulata Vs. Anupam, under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act expeditiously. 4. The petitioner has filed the aforesaid suit for divorce on 17.01.2024. On 30.09.2024 the learned Family Court had passed an order recording that the summons of the suit were served on the defendant but neither he was present before the court nor had any application for adjournment been filed on his behalf. The defendant had merely filed an application seeking exemption from appearance, therefore, the Family Court has ordered the suit to be proceeded ex-parte. Thereafter, the order to proceed ex-parte was set aside by means of an order dated 02.12.2024. The written statement filed by the defendant was taken on record. The issues have not been framed. 5. Section 21-B of Hindu Marriage Act provides as follows: "21B. Special provision relating to trial and disposal of petitions under the Act.- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Prince Singh, Akhil Anand Counsel for Respondent(s) : Madhu Lata .....Petitioner(s) Addl. Prin. Judge Family Court Ayodhya And Another .....Respondent(s) (1) The trial of a petition under this Act shall, so far as is practicable consistently with the interests of justice in respect of the trial, be continued from day to day until its conclusion unless the court finds the adjournment of the trial beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded. (2) Every petition under this Act shall be tried as expeditiously as possible and endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of service of notice of the petition on the respondent. (3) Every appeal under this Act shall be heard as expeditiously as possible, and endeavour shall be made to conclude the hearing within three months from the date of service of notice of appeal on the respondent." 6. Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, the petition is disposed of and a direction is issued to learned learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ayodhya to decide the Suit No.59 of 2024: Madhulata Vs. Anupam, under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act expeditiously in accordance with law keeping in view the statutory mandate provided under Section 21-B of Hindu Marriage Act and without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, by fixing dates at short intervals. November 27, 2025 Ram. A227 No. 6924 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench