Madras High Court
C.Rajumohan vs Banumathi on 11 August, 2022
W.A.(MD)No.845 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.08.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
AND
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA
W.A.(MD)No.845 of 2022
C.Rajumohan :Appellant
Vs.
1.Banumathi
2.Hariharan
3.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep. by its Agricultural Production Commissioner,
and Principal Secretary to Government
Fort St. George, Chennai.
4.The Joint Director of Agriculture
Agriculture Department
Kattuthottam
Tanjore : Respondents
PRAYER: Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the order dated 13.09.2019 made in W.P.(MD) No.7356 of 2014.
For Appellant : Mr.PT.S.Narendravasan
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.845 of 2022
For Respondents : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja for R3&4
Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.N.PRAKASH, J.)
One Natarajan was working as an Agriculture Officer in the
department of Agriculture. He was married to Banumathy and through
the wedlock, he has two children, a son and a daughter. On account of
marital discord, Banumathy got estranged from Natarajan. Banumathy
and her children filed a petition in M.C.No.6/1993 under Section 125 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure in the Court of Judicial Magistrate,
No.II, Ramanathapuram, claiming maintenance from Natarajan. It
appears that the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.II Ramanathapuram had
dismissed the claim of maintenance qua Banumathy but granted Rs.400/-
per month as maintenance for the children. While so, Natarajan died and
his widow Banumathy claimed his terminal benefits, which was objected
to by Rajumohan, the brother of Natarajan. In such circumstances,
Banumathy filed W.P.(MD) No.7356 of 2014, in which, a learned single
Judge of this Court, after hearing Banumathy, the official respondents
and Rajumohan, has, by order dated 13.09.2019, allowed the writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.845 of 2022
petition, aggrieved by which, Rajumohan has preferred the present writ
appeal.
2. Heard Mr.PT.S.Narendravasan, learned counsel for the
appellant, who submitted that Banumathy would not be entitled to any
terminal benefits, because she had got estranged from Natarajan and that
apart, the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.II, Ramanathapuram, had even
denied payment of maintenance to her.
3. The fact remains that Banumathy is the widow of Natarajan and
her marital status is not in dispute. Just because, the learned Judicial
Magistrate, No.II, Ramanathapuram had dismissed her claim for
maintenance, it would not mean that she would be dis-entitled to the
terminal benefits of Natarajan.
4. In the result, we find no merits in the writ appeal and
accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.
[P.N.P., J.] & [R.H., J.]
11.08.2022
Internet : Yes
RR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.845 of 2022
To
1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner,
and Principal Secretary to Government
Fort St. George, Chennai.
2.The Joint Director of Agriculture
Agriculture Department
Kattuthottam
Tanjore
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.845 of 2022
P.N.PRAKASH, J
AND
R.HEMALATHA, J
RR
Order made in
W.A.(MD)No.845 of 2022
11.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
