[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
K.Sureshkumar vs Pushpalatha on 10 April, 2026
CRL MP No. 624 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-04-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
CRL MP Nos.624 & 628 of 2026
AND
CRL RC SR NO. 89484 & 89485 OF 2025
1. K.Sureshkumar
S/o. Late Krishnan, Residing at Door
No.513, Block No.2, Thiru Vi Ka
Nagar, Narasothipatti, Salem-636004.
Petitioner(s)in both MPs
Vs
1. Pushpalatha
W/o. Sureshkumar,
2.Minor Smithin Karthikeyan
Minor rep by N/F/Guardian,
Mother Pushpalatha,
Both are residing at
Door No.588, Ammasi Nagar,
Thiruvavagoundanoor Bye pass,
Sooramangalam,Salem-636005.
Respondent(s) in both MPs
CRL RC SR No. 89484 of 2025
1. K.Sureshkumar
S/o. Late Krishnan, Residing at Door
No.513, Block No.2, Thiru Vi Ka
Nagar, Narasothipatti, Salem-636004.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Pushpalatha
W/o. Sureshkumar,
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL MP No. 624 of 2026
2.Minor Smithin Karthikeyan
Minor rep by N/F/Guardian,
Mother Pushpalatha,
Both are residing at
Door No.588, Ammasi Nagar, Thiruvavagoundanoor Bye pass,
Sooramangalam,Salem-636005.
Respondent(s)
CRL RC SR No. 89485 of 2025
1. K.Sureshkumar
S/o. Late Krishnan, Residing at Door
No.513, Block No.2, Thiru Vi Ka
Nagar, Narasothipatti, Salem-636004.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Pushpalatha
W/o. Sureshkumar,
2.Minor Smithin Karthikeyan
Minor rep by N/F/Guardian,
Mother Pushpalatha,
Both are residing at
Door No.588, Ammasi Nagar, Thiruvavagoundanoor Bye pass,
Sooramangalam,Salem-636005.
Respondent(s)
CRL MP Nos.624 & 628 of 2026
PRAYER
These Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions filed under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, praying to condone the delay of 599 days to file these Criminal
Revision Petitions to set aside the order dated 11.12.2023 in Crl.M.P.No. 01 &
02 of 2022 in M.C. No.70 of 2016 on the file of the Hon’ble Family Court
Judge, Salem.
CRL RC SR Nos. 89484 & 89485 of 2025
PRAYER
Criminal Revision Petitions filed under Section 438 of BNSS, praying to
set aside the order dated 11.12.2023 in Crl.M.P.No. 1 & 2 of 2022 in M.C.
2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL MP No. 624 of 2026
No.70 of 2016 on the file of the Honble Family Court Judge, Salem.
For Petitioner(s): M/s.L.Ramanathan
in both cases
For Respondent(s): M/S. R.Sripriya
in both cases
******
COMMON ORDER
The present applications have been filed to condone the delay of 599 days
in filing these Criminal Revision Petitions.
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for
the respondents.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though he was
advised to file a criminal revision there was a delay of 599 days for mobilising
money for filing criminal revision. Hence, prayed to condone the delay.
4.The said contention was stoutly objected by the learned counsel for the
respondent and would contend that the marriage took place in the year of 2012,
and that maintenance was ordered to the petitioner on 13.11.2018 directing the
petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month from the date of the petition,
but, without taking any steps to pay arrears, to defeat the respondents’ right, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petitioner has settled his property in favour of his mother vide settlement deed
dated 27.12.2019. After transferring the property, he challenged the maintenance
order, in Crl.RC.No.788 of 2021, wherein this Court vide order dated
19.02.2022 has dismissed the same on the ground that the petitioner has also
filed an application to set aside the ex-parte order passed in MC.No.70 of 2016
with a delay condonation affidavit.
5.I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.
6.While looking into the delay, it was 935 days in filing the first round of
application to set aside the ex parte maintenance order in MC.No.70 of 2026.
The Court, after elaborately considering various aspects dismissed the delay
condonation application. Now the present revision is against the dismissal of
above delay (935 days) condonation application. If really the petitioner had
aggrieved with such dismissal, he ought to have preferred the present revision
immediately. However, here, there is a further delay of 599 days in filing the
present Criminal Revisions. Though the learned counsel would submit that due
to Covid-19, there was a delay during 2021, here the order was passed in the
earlier to set aside the ex parte application was on 11.12.2023, well after
Covid-19.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7.The only allegation by the petitioner for condoning the delay is, for
mobilising the fund. The above allegation is vague and cannot be accepted at
all. However, taking into consideration of the fact that the order passed in
MC.No.70 of 2016 was ex parte in nature, and subsequently, the delay
condonation application and the application to set aside the order, was also
dismissed on the premise that the petitioner in Crl.RC.No.788 of 2021 was
dismissed, this Court is inclined to condone the delay on stringent condition
directing the petitioner to pay part of arrears of maintenance in sum of Rs.10
lakhs on or before 01.06.2026, failing which these applications will be
dismissed without any further reference to this Court.
8.In the result, this petition is allowed on condition that the petitioner
shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- [Rupees Ten lakhs only] before the Family
Court, Salem on or before 01.06.2026, failing which, these applications will be
dismissed automatically without any further reference to this Court. On such
deposit, the respondents are entitled to withdraw the same on filing proper
application.
10-04-2026
kmi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.KUMARAPPAN J.
kmi
CRL MP Nos.624 & 628 of
in CRL RC SR NOS.89484
& 89485 OF 2025
10-04-2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
