Madras High Court
R.Radhika vs G.Ramesh Babu on 18 September, 2024
C.R.P. No. 2765 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.09.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P. No. 2765 of 2024
and
C.M.P. No. 14674 of 2024
R.Radhika ... Petitioner / Petitioner /
Petitioner / Respondent
Vs.
G.Ramesh Babu ...Respondent / Respondent /
Respondent / Petitioner
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, to call for the records in I.A. No. 3 of 2024 in O.P. No.
3490 and 3980 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court at
Chennai and set aside the order passed in I.A. No. 3 of 2024 in O.P. No. 3490
and 3980 of 2019 dated 14.06.2024
For Petitioner : Mr. K.Ashok Chakravarthy
Assisted by Mr. M.Vijaya Kumar
For Respondent : Mr. J.Saravanavel
ORDER
This civil revision petition arises against the order of the learned
Principal Judge, Family Court at Madras in I.A. No. 3 of 2019 in O.P. No.
3490 of 2019 dated 14.06.2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. Heard Mr. K.Ashok Chakravarthy for Mr. M.Vijaya Kumar for the
civil revision petitioner and Mr. J.Saravanavel for the respondent.
3. There is no dispute in relationship between the parties. The civil
revision petitioner is the wife and the respondent is the husband. The
respondent filed O.P. No. 254 of 2013 on the file of the Subordinate Judge at
Tambaram seeking divorce. This proceeding was transferred to the file of the
Family Court at Chennai and renumbered as O.P. No. 3980 of 2019.
Subsequently, the wife preferred O.P. No. 3490 of 2019 for restitution of
conjugal rights. The matter is now pending before the Principal Family Court
at Chennai. Both sides would invite me to see the previous litigations between
the parties. I do not think any of the orders passed previously are germane to
the present proceedings.
4. The present revision arises against the order of the learned Principal
Judge, Family Court in dismissing a petition filed by the wife seeking for joint
trial of O.P. No. 3980 of 2019 and O.P. No. 3490 of 2019. She dismissed the
petition on the ground that the stages of the case are different and therefore a
joint trial of the cases is not feasible.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. One is a proceeding for divorce and another is a proceeding for
restitution of conjugal rights. Interest of justice demands that both the
proceedings should be disposed of by a common judgment. The different
stages of the proceedings has come about on account of the proceedings being
transferred from Tambaram to Chennai. It can be resolved in a very easy
manner. O.P. No. 3980 of 2019 is at the stage of the respondent side evidence.
The stage of O.P. No. 3490 of 2019 is at petitioner side evidence. Therefore,
the learned Family Judge, instead of having a joint trial, can have separate but
simultaneous trial and dispose of both the proceedings by a common
judgment.
6. To clarify, the respondent wife shall give her evidence in O.P. No.
3980 of 2019 and thereafter give her evidence in O.P. No. 3490 of 2019. The
learned counsel for the husband shall cross examine the wife on both the
evidences but they shall be recorded separately. Once the evidence of the wife
is concluded, the learned Judge will adjourn O.P. No. 3980 of 2019, awaiting
the recording of evidence by the husband in O.P. No. 3490 of 2019. Once the
evidence in both the cases are completed, the learned Judge shall pass a
common judgment disposing of both the proceedings.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. At this stage Mr. J.Saravanavel would submit that though different
directions have been given by this Court for disposal of the proceedings, the
matter is still languishing at the stage of trial. Mr. K.Ashok Chakravarthy
submits that his client would be willing for recording of evidence as
expeditiously as the exigencies of the diary of the Family Court permits. The
learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai is requested to dispose of both
the proceedings within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order. The learned Judge is requested to ensure that unnecessary
adjournments are not granted to either parties.
8. In the result, the civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
18.09.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order : Yes/No
NCC : Yes/No
pal
Note: Issue order copy by 20.09.2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
The Principal Judge, Family Court at Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.,
pal
18.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
