Madras High Court
P.Senthil Murugan vs Prabhavathi on 11 January, 2021
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Crl.RC.No.1160 of 2020 and
Crl.M.P.No.8130 of 2020
P.Senthil Murugan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Prabhavathi
2.Minor Sneha
3.Minor Harish ... Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 read with
Section 401 of Cr.P.C. to call for records in connection with the
Judgment dated 27.08.2019 made in C.A.No.47 of 2017 on the file of
Principal District and Sessions Court, Salem, in confirming the Judgment
dated 14.09.2015 made in M.C.No.1 of 2011 on the file of Judicial
Magistrate, Thirukovilur and set aside the same.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
For Petitioner :Mr.G.Arul Murugan
ORDER
This Criminal Revision has been filed against the Judgment dated
27.08.2019 made in C.A.No.47 of 2017 on the file of Principal District
and Sessions Court, Salem, in confirming the Judgment dated 14.09.2015
made in M.C.No.1 of 2011 on the file of Judicial Magistrate,
Thirukovilur and set aside the same.
2. The petitioner is the husband, the first respondent is the wife
and the second and third respondents are the minor children. The
respondents filed the Maintenance case before the Judicial Magistrate,
Thirukovilur in M.C.No.1 of 2011 under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 of the
Domestic Violence Act. The learned Judicial Magistrate after the enquiry
awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards maintenance to the respondents.
Challenging the said order, the petitioner approached the District
Sessions Judge in C.A.No.47 of 2017. The learned Judge after hearing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
either side the appeal dismissed the Appeal on 27.08.2019, by confirming
the order passed by the learned Magistrate. Challenging the said
Judgment, the petitioner has filed this revision.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
petitioner filed petition for Divorce against the first respondent and got
divorce against which, the first respondent filed C.M.A.No.14 of 2017
before the learned Principal Court, Villupuram and the same was
dismissed, which aspect was not considered by the Courts below. He
would further submit that after the H.M.O.P. filed for divorce was
allowed, the respondents filed a petition for maintenance, but the Courts
below failed to consider the same and awarded maintenance. He would
further contend that the Courts below failed to consider the fact that the
respondents are now residing in the house of the petitioner, despite the
fact that the first respondent is having a house in her name. Hence, he
prays that the order passed by the learned Magistrate as well as the
learned Principal District and Sessions Judge is liable to be set aside.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
3.Heard. Perused the materials on record.
4. Admittedly, the relationship of the parties are not disputed.
Though the petitioner has stated that the respondents are living in the
house of the petitioner, at the time of filing the petition before the
learned Magistrate under Domestic Violence Act, admittedly the learned
Magistrate has not awarded any share in the house of the petitioner and
further the respondents also not sought for any share in the property of
the petitioner and only sought permission to reside in the house of the
petitioner and also claimed maintenance. Admittedly the petitioner
divorced the first respondent and now the first respondent is living with
two children. Further, the petitioner is doing the business and his income
is also not disputed. Both the Magistrate and the learned Sessions Judge
on a detailed enquiry found that the respondents have established that the
petitioner has got sufficient means to maintain his wife and children.
Though the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
petitioner got divorce and only after that the first respondent has filed
petition seeking maintenance, it is well settled proposition of law that
the divorced wife is also entitled for maintenance under Section 125 of
Cr.P.C. or the Domestic Violence Act and therefore admittedly at the time
of filing the petition, both the second and third respondent are minors,
the learned Magistrate awarded only a sum of Rs.10,000/- which is very
reasonable and not on the higher side. Since the relationship of the
parties are not disputed and the means of the petitioner were established,
before the trial court, the petitioner who is the dutiful husband and also
the father of the minor children is liable to pay the maintenance. In this
case, admittedly the petitioner has got divorce not on the ground of
adultery. Therefore, under these circumstances, this Court does not find
any merit in the revision. The Trial Court has rightly awarded only a sum
of Rs.10,000/- considering the cost of living as on date and the said
amount is not excessive. Hence this Criminal Revision is liable to be
dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index:Yes/No 11.01.2021
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
arr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
To
1. The Principal District and Sessions Court, Salem.
2. The Judicial Magistrate, Thirukovilur
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
P.VELMURUGAN, J
arr
Crl.RC.No.1160 of 2020
11.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1160 of 2020
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
