Allowed

Anisha Kanam v. Vimal Sheriff

Madras HC22 Jan 2014CRL RC(MD)/393/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the Madurai Bench allowed a Criminal Original Petition challenging a High Court appellate order. The bench declined to interfere with the appellate order remitting the residence question due to a Talaq dispute but directed the trial court to decide the matter within four months given the parties' residence in Singapore.

What did the court decide?

The trial Court is directed to dispose of the matter regarding the claim of right of residence as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months.

Anisha Kanam Vs Vimal Sheriff — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 22.01.2014

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESAN

¶6

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.393 of 2013 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2013

¶7

Anisha Kanam ...Petitioner/Respondent/Petitioner/ Petitioner

1.Vimal Sheriff

2.Mohammed Ali

3.R.Rehana

4.Rajeeth ...Respondents/Appellant/Respondents/ Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, calling for the records pertaining to the order made in C.A.No.38 of 2012,dated 23.11.2012 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli and to set aside the same made under Section 19 (order of residence) protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

¶13

For Petitioner : M/s.C.Manojkumar For R2 to R4 : M/s.T.Senthilkumar

¶14

This revision is filed against the order passed by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli, dated 23.11.2012 in C.A.No.38 of 2012 remanding the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal regarding the claim of right of residence.

¶15

2.The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the respondent is residing at Singapore and the Petitioner is also residing at Singapore along with her parents.

¶16

3.A perusal of the order passed by the appellate Court reveals that insofar as the order of maintenance is concerned, the appellate Court has confirmed the order passed by the trial Court. However, insofar as the right of residence is concerned, since there is a dispute with regard to pronouncement of Talaq, the appellate Court has remitted the matter back to the trial Court to decide whether the Talaq has been properly pronounced in accordance with law and then to decide about the right of residence. The above said order, in my opinion does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality and therefore the order passed by the appellate Court needs no interference by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

¶18

4.However, considering the fact that the revision Petitioner is residing with her parents at Singapore and the matter is pending for nearly about three years, the interest of justice requires to pass appropriate orders for early disposal of the case. Accordingly, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

5.The Criminal Original Petition is ordered accordingly. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶20

Vsn Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar[RTI]

¶22

/True copy/

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

¶25

1.The II Additional Distric and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli.

¶26

2.Do-Thro' The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Trichy.

¶27

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,

¶28

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶29

+1cc to Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, Advocate SR.No.4229.

¶30

Crl.R.C(MD).No.393 of 2013

¶31

Dated:22.01.2014

¶32

2P/5C RPB 11.02.2014

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Anisha Kanam v. Vimal Sheriff

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anisha Kanam v. Vimal Sheriff

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Moorthy Vs the Sub-Inspector of Police

Kavitha Vs the Inspector of Police

The Inspector of Police Vs P.Rajeshkumar

Rajalakshni Vs Kuganpandian

Mrs. Premkumari Vs Mr. v. Mehavannan

Ramachandran Vs the Inspector of Police