Jemini vs Vaijayanthi
2023 Latest Caselaw 15848 Mad

Madras High Court

Jemini vs Vaijayanthi on 7 December, 2023

Author: T.V.Thamilselvi

Bench: T.V.Thamilselvi

                                                                         C.R.P(NPD).No.1585 of 2023

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                   DATED: 07.12.2023

                                                       CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

                                             C.R.P(NPD).No.1585 of 2023
                                             and CMP.No.10353 of 2023

                  Jemini                                                             . .. Petitioner

                                                           Vs
                  Vaijayanthi                                                        ... Respondent


                  Prayer : Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
                  India, praying to set aside the order dated 01.02.2023 passed by the Hon'ble
                  Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri in Crl.A.No.37 of 2020 confirming the
                  order dated 18.02.2020 passed by District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate,
                  Uthangarai made in Crl.M.P.No.1944 of 2019 in D.V.No.5 of 2014.

                                  For Petitioner        : M/s.K.Vijayalakshmi
                                                          Dass and Viswa Associates



                                                          ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order dated

01.02.2023 passed by the Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri in

Crl.A.No.37 of 2020.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. Before the trial Court, the respondent has filed D.V.No.5 of 2014

against the revision petitioner and others. The said DVC was allowed in

favour of the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent has filed

Crl.M.P.No.1944 of 2019 seeking the revision petitioner to pay the

alimoney and compensation to the respondent and the said petition was

ordered by the trial Judge. Against, which, the revision petitioner has

preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.37 of 2020 seeking to set aside the

conviction and awarding maintenance amount imposed against the

appellant/revision petitioner. The said appeal was dismissed by the Appellate

Judge holding that the respondent is entitled to claim possession and

Rs.2,00,000/- was ordered by the trial Judge in D.V.No.5 of 2014. Against

which, the revision petitioner has filed this Civil Revision Petition before

this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is the father-in-law of the respondent and the properties are the self

acquired property. He further submitted that the petitioner's son Megaraj and

his wife and his daughters jointly resides along with the petitioner. After

demise of petitioner's son Megaraj, his wife and minor daughters resides https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

along with the petitioner and the petitioner provides all amenities to them.

He further submitted that the Courts below failed to note that, the petitioner

has not know the marriage solmnized between his son Megaraj and the

respondent/Vaijayanthi. Till the death of Megaraj, the petitioner and his

family members has not seen her face. He further submitted that the

respondent and her minor daughters filed a suit for partition against the

petitioner and others before the learned Subordinate Judge, Uthangarai in

O.S.No.282 of 2014 and the same was dismissed by the trial Court, holding

that the marriage solemnized between the respondent and Megaraj was not

properly proved by the plaintiff/respondent. He further submitted that the

Courts below without adducing proper evidence of documents and without

considering the petitioner's side counter, allowed the petition and direct the

petitioner to pay the entire maintenance amount to the respondent, otherwise

sent him civil prison till the maintenance amount realized by the respondent.

Hence, he prayed to set aside judgment dated 01.02.2023, in Crl.A.No.37 of

2020.

4. On a perusal of the records, it reveals that the plaintiff/respondent

has right over the suir property because the properties are ancestral property

. Hence, the plaintiff/respondent is entitiled to claim possession and for a https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in the order passed by the DVC proceedings.

Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the orders of the Courts

below, since because the plaintiff/respondent is living with the aged parents

along with children without any source of income and the husband of the

respondent also died. Hence, there is no error in the Judgement passed by the

trial Court in Crl.A.No.37 of 2020, dated 01.02.2023.

5. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

07.12.2023

Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No msrm

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

To

1. The Principal District Court, Krishnagiri.

2. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Uthangarai.

3. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

msrm

07.12.2023 (½)

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis