Kumarasamy v. Renukadevi
Case brief
What is this about?
Held the civil revision petition infructuous as parties resolved their dispute and are living together, dismissing the petition and closing the connected miscellaneous petition.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petition dismissed as infructuous; connected miscellaneous petition closed; no order as to costs.
What the court decided
C.R.P.(PD)(MD) No.1925 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.12.2019 CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN C.R.P.(PD)(MD) No.1925 of 2011 and M.P(MD) No.1 of 2011
Kumarasamy ... Petitioner -Vs-
Renukadevi ... Respondent
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 10.08.2011 passed in I.A.No.104 of 2011 in I.A.No.19 of 2008 in H.M.O.P.No.127 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Karur, allow this revision.
For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondent : Mr.S.Anand Chandrasekar for M/S.Sarvabhauman Associates
O R D E R
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against refusing to set aside the ex-parte order made in I.A.No.19 of 2008 an application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking interim maintenance in H.M.O.P.No.127 of 2007.
2.Mr.S.Anand Chandrasekar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/husband would submit that the dispute between the parties has been resolved and they are living together for the past four or five years. Hence, nothing survives in the Civil Revision Petition. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, there will be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Kumarasamy
- respondent
Renukadevi
Coram
R. Subramanian
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court