1 (RNT,J C.R.P.No.2110 of 2025) APHC010435082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3299] THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2110/2025 Between: 1. NUTHALAPATI SUBBA RAO, S/O LATE VENKAYYA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT D.NO 21-6-28, NEAR GOVT. PRESS, MUTYALAMPADU, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND 1. DEVELLA VENKATESWARA RAO, aS/o Kotayya, Hindu, aged about 66 years, siding at Flat No. FOF.6, 5th Floor, Maheswari Towers, 0pp. Power Grid, Nunna, Block No.4, Vijayawada Rural, N.T.R District, Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased tohe Petitioner, being the petitioner/plaintiff, filed this Civil Revision Petition to expedite the trial and disposal of O.S No498/2025 within a period of six months or within such time as this Honble Court may deem just and appropriate, considering the petitioners advanced age of 72years and ongoing harassmentby respondents and the ongoing harassment by the respondent to unlawfully seize the suit schedule property on the file of the Honble Civil Judge (Junior Division), Vijayawada, begs to prefer the Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition on the following among other grounds 2 (RNT,J C.R.P.No.2110 of 2025) IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to dispense with the Certified Copy of the Case Status in Honble Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Vijayawada in O.S No: 498/2025, in the above C.R.P. and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1. 3 (RNT,J C.R.P.No.2110 of 2025) The Court made the following: ORDER : This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner/plaintiff, seeking a direction to the learned trial Court for expeditious disposal of O.S. No. 498 of 2025, pending before the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Vijayawada, wherein the petitioner seeks ejectment of the respondent/defendant from the suit schedule property and delivery of possession thereof. 2. Heard Sri Karthik Shah, learned counsel appearing for Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer in this petition is confined to a direction for speedy disposal of the suit, in view of the advanced age of the petitioner/plaintiff, who is a senior citizen, and in light of the circular issued by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Roc. No.126/OPCELL-E/2025, dated 27.06.2025. 4. It is further submitted that the suit was filed on 08.04.2025 and is presently at the stage of filing of written statement. 5. In Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi V. State of Maharashtra1, the Hon’ble Apex Court referring to the Constitution Bench 1 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3526 4 (RNT,J C.R.P.No.2110 of 2025) judgment in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad V. State of Uttar Pradesh2, observed at paragraph No.7 as under : “In paragraph 47.3 of the the decision of a Constitution Bench of in the Case of 'High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh', this Court has held that in the ordinary course, the Constitutional Courts should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other Courts. Paragraph 47.3 reads thus: "47.3. Constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other courts. Constitutional courts may issue directions for the time- bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts concerned where the cases are pending.” 6. A direction for expeditious disposal of a pending civil suit can be issued only in exceptional circumstances. Old age of the litigant by itself would not constitute exceptional circumstances, as in many cases, the litigant parties may be of old age and senior citizen. For them to deliver justice already circular has been issued by the High Court. There must be strong and compelling reasons, in particular in a suit filed in 2025 itself, which is lacking. 2 (2024) 6 SCC 267 5 (RNT,J C.R.P.No.2110 of 2025) 7. Accordingly, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, no such direction would be justified. 8. In view of the above, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J Date : 04.09.2025. RPD. 6 (RNT,J C.R.P.No.2110 of 2025) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI (DISMISSED) CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2110 OF 2025 Date : 04.09.2025 RPD.