Allowed

Umamaheswari, v. S.Hemandh, S/O.P.Subramanian

Madras HC17 Mar 2021CMA(MD)/905/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench dismissed the appeal filed by the mother against the Family Court's earlier judgment granting visitation rights. The Court recorded the parties' agreement on a new Joint Compromise Memo regulating visitation, disposed of the appeal based on this settlement, and affirmed the Memo as part of the decree.

What did the court decide?

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal disposed of in terms of the Joint Compromise Memo signed by both parties; Memo becomes part of the decree.

Umamaheswari, Vs S.Hemandh, S/O.P.Subramanian — Child Custody and Guardianship | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.03.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL C.M.A(MD)NO.905 of 2016 and C.M.P(MD)No.8306 of 2016

¶6

Uma Maheswari,

¶7

Daughter of L.Chokkalingam, Judicial Officers Quarters, Madurai, and working as Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai :Appellant/Respondent

¶8

.vs.

¶9

S.Hemandh, Son of P.Subramanian, Babu Apartments, Babu Road, Opposite to Murugan Theatre, and working as Assistant Public Prosecutor at Judicial Magistrate Court No.V., Tiruchirappalli. :Respondent/Petitioner

¶10

PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act praying this Court to set aside the judgment and decree made in G.W.O.P.No.2 of 2015, dated 28.3.2016, on the file of Family Court Judge, Madurai by partly allowing with conditions No.1 to 10 granting visitation rights and custody during the period of visitation given to the respondent herein.

¶11

For Appellant :Mr.D.Srinivasaraghavan For Respondent :Mrs.Lakshmi Gopinathan for M/s.Polax Legal Solutions

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

[Judgment of the Court was made by PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J. ]

¶14

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellant/wife challenging the order made in G.W.O.P.No. 2 of 2015, dated 28.03.2016, on the file of Family Court, Madurai, granting visitation rights to the respondent herein/husband, with certain conditions.

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court including the Joint Compromise Memo filed by both the parties.

¶18

3.The matter was heard for some time and the parties were also present before this Court along with the minor child. After some deliberations, it was agreed by both the parties that they have arrived at an amicable settlement between themselves regarding the visitation rights to see the minor child by the father, the respondent herein. Accordingly, a Joint Compromise Memo, dated 15.03.2021 is filed before this Court by both the appellant as well as the respondent, which is signed by both of them and also by their respective counsels. The terms in the said Joint Compromise Memo are in modification of the earlier decree passed in G.W.O.P.No. 2 of 2015, dated 28.03.2016, which is under challenge in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. Both the parties have agreed for the said terms contained in the Joint Compromise Memo, which reads as follows:

¶19

''1.The Respondent herein shall visit the child''Master U.Sri Prasanna'' during the second Sunday of every English Calendar month after giving one week prior intimation through SMS to phone Number 9865242075 of the appellant herein.

¶20

2.The parties agree that the respondent/Father on that day can visit the child at Gandhi Mandapam, Chennai from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., and he shall be permitted to be with the child for 4 hours.

¶21

3.Any change of place in future shall be fixed by parties by mutual agreement if needed in future.

¶22

4.If there is any difficulty for either parties or to the child for arranging the meeting on second Sunday of the month, they shall have it on 4^th Sunday after due intimation among them.

¶23

5.During such visitation of the child, both the Appellant and Respondent should not cause any annoyance in the presence of the child.

¶24

6.The parties agree that the first visit of the respondent after this compromise shall commence from the month of July, 2021.''

¶25

4.It is also relevant to note that the matrimonial dispute between the parties have come to an end and this is only in respect of visitation rights to see the minor child by the father/the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondent herein. Any modification in the above arrangement can be adjusted as mentioned in the Joint Compromise Memo itself by the parties among themselves.

¶26

¶27

5.In view of the above, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of in terms of the Joint Compromise Memo. The Joint Compromise Memo shall form part and parcel of the judgment and decree. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶28

Assistant Registrar (CSIII)

¶29

// True Copy //

¶30

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶31

Note :

¶32

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate / litigant concerned.

¶33

ENCL:Xerox Copy of joint Compromise Memo

¶34

¶35

1.The Judge, Family Court, Madurai.

¶36

2.The Record Keeper,(2C) Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶37

+1 CC to M/s.M.MUTHUGEETHAYAN, Advocate ( SR-12103[F] dated 18/03/2021 )

¶38

C.M.A(MD)NO.905 of 2016 and C.M.P(MD)No.8306 of 2016 17.03.2021

¶39

KM(CO) KB(19.04.2021) 3P 5C

¶40

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

Umamaheswari, v. S.Hemandh, S/O.P.Subramanian

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umamaheswari, v. S.Hemandh, S/O.P.Subramanian

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

B.Saraswathy Amma Vs the District Collector

Yasotha, Vs Maruthappan @ Maruthamalai

Secretary Vs John Paul Louis

A. Bharath Kumar Vs the President

S.Sailaja Vs S.Muthulakshmi

Esakki Priya Vs Veeramanikandan