Dismissed

L.Mohana @ Ruth Monisha v. R.Saravanan

Madras HC28 Jun 2023CMA/1982/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal was dismissed as futile. The High Court observed that since the respondent had remarried with children after the divorce order, the chances of marital reunion were lost, rendering further adjudication pointless. The appeal against the Family Court's divorce order was thus dismissed without costs.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was dismissed and the Order and Decree of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai, dated 07.01.2012 was confirmed.

L.Mohana @ Ruth Monisha Vs R.Saravanan — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.M.A.No.1982 of 2012

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 28.06.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHACHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

C.M.A.No.1982 of 2012

¶7

L.Mohana @ Ruth Monisha

¶8

... Appellant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

R.Saravanan ...Respondent

¶11

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family

¶12

Court Act,against the Order and Decreetal Order dated 07.01.2012 on the

¶13

file of the 1st Additional Judge, Family court, Chennai.

¶14

For Appellant : Mrs.S.Alagammal

¶15

For Respondent : Mr.Syed Nizamuddin Ahmad Hussaini

¶16

J U D G M E N T

¶17

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the wife aggrieved by

¶18

the order of the I Additional Family Court at Chennai daed 07.01.2012 in O.P.No.1652/2006, in and by which, the petition for divorce filed by the

¶19

respondent/husband on the ground of cruelty was allowed by the trial

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

Page 1/4

¶22

C.M.A.No.1982 of 2012

¶23

Court.

¶24

The brief facts are that the parties got married on 16.09.2004

¶25

and one daughter was born on 27.08.2005 and thereafter, since there were marital discord between the parties, they started living separately and the O.P. came to be filed in the year 2006. When the appeal filed in C.M.A.No.1982/2012, is taken up for final hearing, it now transpires that after the order of divorce, the respondent/ husband got remarried and even got two children of the said marriage.

¶26

Under these circumstances, even though the learned counsel for the respondent/wife submitted that still she may have some ground to canvass the matter, practically, the chances of reunion is lost. Therefore, there is no point in further adjudicating the matter and it is also pertinent to state that there was also no order of stay granted pending the appeal. In that view of the matter, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed, by confirming the order of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai, dated 07.01.2012 in O.P.No.1652/2006. No costs.

¶27

(J.N.B,J.) (D.B.C, J.) Index : Yes / No 28.06.2023 Internet : Yes vsi Page 2/4

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

C.M.A.No.1982 of 2012

¶30

¶31

The I Additional Family Court, Chennai,

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

Page 3/4

¶34

C.M.A.No.1982 of 2012

¶35

J. NISHA BANU, J. and D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.

¶36

vsi

¶37

C.M.A.No.1982 of 2012

¶38

28.06.2023

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

Page 4/4

L.Mohana @ Ruth Monisha v. R.Saravanan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Mohana @ Ruth Monisha v. R.Saravanan

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

N.Hepzhiba Vs P.Tennyson

The Principal Secretary to Government Vs K.Chandrasekar

Ram Viswanathan Vs Durga Ram

Afzal Raheel Hussain Vs Zakira Asghar Khan

Nathiya Vs Shanmugam

S.Bhanukopan Vs G.Suganya