The High Court dismissed a criminal revision under Cr.P.C. challenging an order confirming maintenance and custody directions under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, finding the petitioner not to be without means.
The criminal revision case stands dismissed and connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.09.2014
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.T. SELVAM
Crl.R.C. No.904 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2014
Gunasekaran .. Petitioner Vs. Kalaiselvi ... Respondent Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 r/w.Sec.401 Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 07.07.2014 passed by the VII Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, in C.A.No.100 of 2013 in confirming the order dated 29.04.2013 passed by the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai 15 in C.M.P.No.4983 of 2010. For Petitioner : Mr.E.C.Ramesh ORDER
The petitioner/husband has preferred the present revision against the order dated 7.7.2014, passed by the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, in C.A.No.100 of 2013, confirming the order, dated 29.4.2013, passed by the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, in M.P.No.4983 of 2010.
4.On perusal of the order under challenge, particularly, the exhibits marked by the respondent/wife in the proceedings before the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, we are fairly satisfied that the petitioner is not a man without means. The petitioner owes a responsibility to provide sufficiently for the wife as also his three children. The order under challenge is, in the circumstances of the case, justified and we find no reason to interfere with the same. This criminal revision case stands dismissed. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/-
Asst. Registrar[cs.iii]
Dt/-24/09/2014
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar.
msk
To
1.The XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai
2. -do- through The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.
3. The VII Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Madras,
4. The Prl. Sessions Judge, Chennai.
5.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras
Crl.R.C. No.904 of 2014
rsy[co]
gp/25.9
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to interfere with the order directing the petitioner to pay maintenance and child support.
Whether the petitioner had sufficient means to effect payment of the awarded amount.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Gunasekaran
Kalaiselvi
C.T. Selvam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
