The High Court refused to quash the maintenance proceedings at the Family Court, holding that the trial court must examine the foreign judgment's effect before deciding.
Direction to Court below to complete proceedings within three months.
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 : 18.12.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
Crl.O.P.No.4879 of 2018
and Crl.M.P.No.2602 & 13335 of 2018
M.Senthilkumar ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.Priyalakshmi 2.Minor S.Yashvi Maya 3.Minor S.Aradhaya (Rep.by their mother/1st respondent) ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in Maintenance petition vide M.C.No.273 of 2017 on the file of the Hon'ble VI Family Court, at Chennai and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Ravi Shankar
For Respondent : Mr.S.Arivazhagan M.Venkatesh O R D E R
This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in M.C.No.273 of 2017, on the file of the VI Family Court, Chennai.
2 This petition has been filed by the husband solely on the ground that the first respondent had given up her right for claiming maintenance before the Circuit Court of the city of Alexandria in U.S.A on 16.09.2015 and therefore, the respondent wife cannot claim any maintenance from the petitioner.
3 It is seen from the records that there are two girl children aged about 7 years and 3 years respectively, who are maintained by the respondent. The petitioner is trying to take advantage of the order passed by the Foreign Court and the effect of the said order has to be put to test only before the Court below and this Court cannot interfere with the proceedings initiated by the respondent wife at this stage.
4 This Criminal Original Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the Court below to complete the proceedings in M.C.No.273 of 2017, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is left open to the petitioner to raise all the contentions before the Court below and the Court below shall consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mpa/rpl
To
The VI Family Court, Chennai.
+1 cc to M/s.S.Arivazhagan, Advocate, S.R.No.88150
Crl.O.P.No.4879 of 2018
and Crl.M.P.No.13335 & 2602 of 2018
CP(CO)
SSM(10/01/2019)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interference with the maintenance proceedings while the court below is examining the foreign judgment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M. Senthilkumar
Priyalakshmi
Minor S. Yashvi Maya
Minor S. Aradhaya
N. Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
