1 2026:CGHC:21036 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 537 of 2026 1 - Smt. Nisha Singhania W/o Mr. Rakesh Singhania, Aged About 36 Years (Earlier Nish Agrawal W/o Late Nilesh Agrawal (Goyal) R/o Ward No. 1 Darri Road, Tehsil And District. Korba (C.G.) 2 - Minor Shubhansh Singhania S/o Mr. Rakesh Singhania, Aged About 9 Years Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Nisha Singhania R/o Ward No. 1 Darri Road, Tehsil And District. Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Satyanarayan Goyal (Agrawal) S/o Tarachand Goyal (Agrawal) Aged About 58 Years R/o House No. 786 Ward No. 14, Nagar Panchayat Kunra, Thana-Dharsiwa, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Sarla Goyal (Agrawal) W/o Satyanarayan Goyal (Agrawal) Aged About 62 Years R/o House No. 786 Ward No. 14, Nagar Panchayat Kunra, Thana- Dharsiwa, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 05.05. 202 6 1. The present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking limited prayer to direct the 2 Family Court to expedite the proceeding of MJC No.1/2021 which is pending before the Family Court, Korba since 02.12.2020. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are non applicants before the Family Court, Korba. The respondents No.1&2 are prosecuting an application under Section 7 of The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (in short, the Act, 1956) for declaring themselves to be the guardian of non applicant No.2 as they are grandparents of non applicant No.2. He would further submit that for one or other reasons the proceedings of the case is adjourned for time to time, however, by order dated 18.08.2022 the non applicant No.1 was directed to keep the non applicant No.2 present before the court for visitation right of the applicants and the non applicant No.1 is taking the non applicant No.2 on the dates of hearing but the hearing could not be substantiated and it is being adjourned regularly. Therefore, the Family Court may be directed to conclude the trial of the case as early as possible within stipulated time frame as the case has been fixed for recording applicant’s evidence. 3. I have heard the counsel for the petitioners and perused the record annexed with the petition. 4. The limited prayer made by the petitioners is for expeditious trial of MJC case which is pending before the Family Court since 02.12.2020. From perusal of the order sheets it transpires that both the parties have taken adjournment for one or other reasons, however, the fact remains that on 18.08.2022 the non applicant No.1 was directed to keep the non applicant No.2 present before the court in each and every dates for visitation right of the applicants. Though, she had taken time on 3 various occasions to produce the minor child before the court, however, there is no substantial proceeding since 2022 till date except deciding certain applications filed by the respective parties. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also that the application under Section 7 of the Act, 1956 is pending since 02.12.2020 and the case is at the stage of recording plaintiff’s evidence, this court deem it appropriate to direct the Family Court Korba to expedite the trial of the case and to decide the same within a period of six months from the next date fixed before it, or from the date of production of a copy of this order, whichever is earlier, in accordance with law. 6. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder