Dismissed

Balan Armstrong v. Agnes Celina Joice

Madras HC28 Jun 2023CRP(MD)/1505/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A revision petition was filed challenging the admission of an amendment petition in restitution of conjugal rights proceedings. The High Court held the text of the petition is without merit, emphasizing that the lower Family Court should decide the maintainability of the applicant. The court permitted no costs and directed expedited disposal of the main petition.

What did the court decide?

The civil revision petition was dismissed with directions to the family court to dispose of the underlying petition within six months.

Balan Armstrong Vs Agnes Celina Joice — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P(MD)No.1505 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 28.06.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

C.R.P(MD)No.1505 of 2023 and C.M.P(MD)No.7391 of 2023

¶7

Balan Armstrong ...Petitioner/Respondent/ Petitioner Vs.

¶8

Agnes Celinga Joice ...Respondent/Petitioner/ Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to direct the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli to struck down the petition in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in H.M.O.P.No.52 of 2022 on the file of the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Haja Mohideen

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed to direct the

¶13

Family Court, Tiruchirappalli to struck down the petition in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in H.M.O.P.No.52 of 2022.

¶14

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

¶15

1/4

¶16

C.R.P(MD)No.1505 of 2023

¶17

The petitioner is the husband who has filed H.M.O.P.No.52 of

¶18

2022 for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. In the said proceeding, the respondent has filed I.A.No.2 of 2022 under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C to reject the application filed by the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights.

¶19

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶20

It is not clear how the parties have invoked the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act as the names of the respective parties indicate that they follow Christianity. Be that as it may, all the issues regarding maintainability of I.A.No.2 of 2022 itself can be decided by the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli. I find no merits in the present civil revision petition. The petitioner is directed to file counter in I.A.No.2 of 2022. If such counter has not been filed. In case such counter is filed, the same shall be disposed of by the Court as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In any event, H.M.O.P.No.52 of 2022 shall be disposed of within 6 months.

¶21

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

¶22

2/4

¶23

C.R.P(MD)No.1505 of 2023

¶24

The present Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

28.06.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sn

¶26

¶27

1.The Family Court, Tiruchirappalli.

¶28

2.The Section Officer Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶29

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

¶30

3/4

¶31

C.R.P(MD)No.1505 of 2023

¶32

C.SARAVANAN,J.

¶33

¶34

C.R.P(MD)No.1505 of 2023

¶35

28.06.2023

¶36

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

¶37

4/4

Balan Armstrong v. Agnes Celina Joice

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balan Armstrong v. Agnes Celina Joice

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

Vedamony Vs South Indian Assemblies of God Church

Hemalatha Vs Regubathi Gandhi

Sundaresan Pillai Vs Sunil Kumar

Guru Devi, Vs S. Prabhu

P.Mangaanperiyasamy Vs Vairakal

T.R.Pradeep Babu Vs M.S.Rubavathi