APHC010501452025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) Tuesday, the twenty fifth The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Civil Revision Petition No: Between: L Sai Ramesh S. Gangadhar and others Counsel for the petitioner: B. Parameswara Rao Counsel for the respondent 1.S anjaya Virgil Jala The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) twenty fifth day of November two thousand and twenty five Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Civil Revision Petition No: 2496 of 2025 ...Petitioner and S. Gangadhar and others ...Respondent etitioner: espondents: The Court made the following: [3311] two thousand and twenty five Petitioner Respondents 2 C.R.P.No.2496 of 2025 O R D E R: This revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to issue appropriate directions for expeditious disposal of a suit in O.S.No.535 of 2024 pending on the file of the court of Junior Civil Judge, Dharmavaram. 2. The suit was originally registered as O.S.No.59 of 2022 on the file of the court of Junior Civil Judge, Puttaparthi and later as O.S.No.535 of 2024 on transfer to the court of Junior Civil Judge, Dharmavaram. As can be seen from the docket proceedings, initially suit was adjourned from time to time on 28.06.2022 for summons, on 28.06.2022 and 08.07.2022 for written statement and thereafter since 20.07.2022 till 08.08.2024 due to pendency of the interlocutory applications. Even after transfer of the suit, it was posted for ‘notice’ from 30.12.2024 to 16.09.2025 and thereafter on 16.09.2025 and 17.10.2025 due to pendency of interlocutory applications, the suit was adjourned. At this juncture, the revision petitioner / plaintiff filed this revision petition. 3. The Supreme Court in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Vs. State of U.P. & others (Criminal Appeal No.3589 of 2023, dated 29.02.2024) gave a caution to High Courts not to direct the trial Courts for expeditious disposal of the case except in exceptional cases as there may be other older cases which need early disposal and such direction would adversely affect the functioning of the trial Courts. It is held in para 37 (c) as follows: “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 concerned Courts where the cases are pending”. 3 C.R.P.No.2496 of 2025 4. In view of the same, the revision petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners / defendants Nos.1 to 6 to make a request to the trial Court for expeditious disposal of the suit. Keeping in view the total pendency of the cases pending before the Court concerned, appropriate steps shall be taken by the trail Court for expeditious trial. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ B. S. BHANUMATHI, J Dt.25.11.2025 PNV