Dismissed

Thangam, 57 Years v. Pandurangan

Madras HC11 Feb 2020CRL RC/1168/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three Criminal Revision Cases were transferred for hearing. Counsel submitted that the respondent/maintenance petitioner of the underlying civil proceedings had died. The High Court, deeming nothing further required for consideration, dismissed the revisions and connected miscellaneous petitions.

What did the court decide?

Crl.R.C.Nos. 1168 to 1170 of 2016 and connected Crl.M.P.Nos. 10329 to 10331 of 2016 were dismissed.

Thangam, 57 Years Vs Pandurangan — Maintenance and Alimony | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.02.2020 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN Crl.R.C.Nos.1168 to 1170 of 2016 and

¶2

Crl.M.P.Nos.10329 to 10331 of 2016

¶3

Thangam … Petitioner in all the Crl.RCs.

¶4

Vs.

¶5

Pandurangan … Respondent in all the Crl.RCs.

¶6

Crl.R.C.No.1168 of 2016 filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. to allow the revision case and dismiss the petition in C.M.P.No.19 of 2016 in M.C.No.8 of 2011 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore.

¶7

Crl.R.C.No.1169 of 2016 filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. to allow the revision case and dismiss the petition in Crl.M.P.No.63 of 2015 in M.C.No.8 of 2011 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore.

¶8

Crl.R.C.No.1170 of 2016 filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. to allow the revision case and dismiss the petition in Crl.M.P.No.1223 of 2013 in M.C.No.8 of 2011 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Baskar

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.P.Mani

¶11

When these Criminal Revision Cases were taken up for consideration, the learned counsel on either side have submitted that the respondent herein, who filed the maintenance case in M.C.No.8 of 2011 before the Trial Court and also the petitions praying to execute the order passed by the Trial Court in the maintenance case, is no more.

¶12

1/2

¶13

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

¶14

2.In view of the above submission, nothing further remains to be considered in these Criminal Revision Cases and accordingly the same are dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to proceed in the manner known to law. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.

¶15

Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CS VI)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
KM
To
1.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore.
2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.
+1 cc to M/s.P.Mani Advocate sr10825
Crl.R.C.Nos.1168 to 1170
of 2016 and
Crl.M.P.Nos.10329 to 10331
of 2016
aa10/03/2020
2/2

¶16

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

Thangam, 57 Years v. Pandurangan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thangam, 57 Years v. Pandurangan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Periyasamy Vs State by

S.Sekar Vs Sri.K.Mariasamy

Shyla Vs Josewilfred

Bhuvaneswaran Vs State Represented by

Venkatchalam Vs State Rep. by Its

Sumithra Vs Ramadoss Rao