CRP/333/2026 of Sri Sudhagoni Ram Prakash Goud Vs Smt. Bedenkani Priyanka on 6 February 2026

i

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:

oF 2026

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia seeking disposal of case in F.C.O P No. 92 Of 2023, on the file of the Court of the lll Additional District and Sessions Judge-Cum-ll Additioanl Metropolitan Sessions Judge- Cum-Principal Judge, Family Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally.

Between

Sri Sudhagoni Ram Prakash Goud, S/o. S. Yadagiri Goud, Aged. 35 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. H. No. 7-4-301, Geetha Nagar, Ferozguda, Balanagar - 50001 1.

...PETITIONER/PETITIONER

AND

Smt. Bedenkani Priyanka, Wo. Sudhagoni

Aged. 27 years, Occ. Event Manager @

169/6/D, Vijaynagar Colony, Bhagathsing N

District - 500 011

Ram Prakash Goud, D/o. B. Raju,

Film Shootings, R/o. H. No.28-

agar, Chiptal, Medchal - Malkajgiri

...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M. Saiprakash Goud Counsel for the Respondent :

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE, OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.333 OF 2026

DATE OF ORDER: 06.02.2026

Between

Sudhagonr Ram Prakash Goud.

Petitioner.

AND

Bedenkani Priyanka.

Respondent.

ORAL OITDER:

Heard Mr.M.Sai Prakash Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner/husband.

2.

Petitioner/husband filed the present revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a direction to the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Il Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Principal Judge, Family Court, Medchal - Malkajgiri at Kukatpally, to dispose of F.C.O.P.No.92

r

of 2023, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

3.

Petitioner/husband filed the aforesaid F.c.o.p.No.92 of 2023 under Section l3(l)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

against the respondent/wife seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. According to the petitioner, respondent was set ex parte and she has filed an lnterlocutory Application with a request to set aside the said ex parte order and the same was allowed. The matter was posted on 14.06.2024 on which date petitioner has filed his affidavit in lieu of chief-examination and Exs.A.l to A.5 were marked. He has reported no further evidence. It was posted for hearing. At that stage, respondent filed an application to set aside the ex parte order and the same was allowed. Even then respondent is not cooperating with the learned Family Court for disposal of the said o.P. and learned Family court is not disposing of the said F.C.O.P. in accordance with law. Therefore, petitioner has filed the present revision.

4.

As discussed szpra,'the said F.C.O.P. is of the year 2023.

Perusal c'f the docket orders would reveal that the respondent was set ex parte and petitioner was examined-in-chief on L4.06.2024

and mark.ed Exs.A.l to A.5. Even according to the petitioner, the application filed by the respondent to set aside the ex parte order was allovsed.

5.

In the light of the same, considering the fact that F.C.O.P. is of the year 2023 and the disputes between the petitioner and respondent are matrimonial disputes, this Civil Revision Petition is disposr:d of directing the learned Family Court to make an endeavor to dispose of the said F.C.O.P.No.92 of 2023, strictly in accordanc,e with law, as expeditiously as possible.

As il sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

//TRUE COPY//

SD/- M.NAGAMANI

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION OFFICER

To,