Allowed

Amudha v. S.Satheeswaran

Madras HC9 Sept 2023TR CMP/93/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

At a National Lok Adalat, a family maintenance petitioner and respondent reached a compromise. They agreed to transfer proceedings from the Sub Court, Thirumangalam to the VI Additional Family Court, Chennai, and settled temporary maintenance and visitation terms.

What did the court decide?

Providing Rs. 10,000/- monthly maintenance, bearing children's educational expenses, allowing visitation, and directing transfer of proceedings to VI Additional Family Court, Chennai.

Amudha Vs S.Satheeswaran — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, CHENNAI National Lok Adalat organised by the High Court Legal Services Committee Saturday, the 09^th day of September, 2023 NATIONAL LOK ADALAT

¶2

(Chapter VI and u/s 21 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987)

¶3

Presided over by

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN AND

¶5

Members

¶6

Mr.G.Dharmaraj, District Judge (Retd.) Mr.C.K.Chandrasekkar, Advocate

¶7

Tr.C.M.P.No.93 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.2059 of 2023

¶8

(Seeking withdrawal of H.M.O.P.No.209 of 2022 on the file of the Sub Court, Thirumangalam and transfer the same to the file of the VI Additional Family Court, Chennai, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed)

¶9

Amudha ... Petitioner

¶10

D/o. Gandhi

¶11

Vs.

¶12

S.Satheeswaran ... Respondent

¶13

S/o.Sivagurunathan

¶14

This case came up for compromise before the National Lok Adalat. Both the parties are present. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.M.Monisha and the learned counsel for the respondent Ms.V.Pushkala are present. After hearing both the parties, this Court passed the following order :

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Both the parties and their respective counsel are present.

¶17

2.The petitioner seeks transfer of the proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.209 of 2022 pending before the Sub Court, Thirumangalam to VI Additional Family Court, Chennai.

¶18

3.The parties have now agreed that the H.M.O.P.No.209 of 2022 can be transferred to the VI Additional Family Court, Chennai. Though the respondent has denied allegations made in this petition, the parties have agreed that the proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.209 of 2022 may be transferred to the file of the VI Additional Family Court, Chennai.

¶19

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

¶20

The parties have also agreed to the following as a temporary measure :

¶21

(a)the respondent shall pay Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) as maintenance to the petitioner and the two children on or before 5^th of every month, directly to the petitioner, from this month.

¶22

(b)The respondent shall also bear the educational expenses of the two children which will be approximately Rs.60,000/-(Rupees Sixty Thousand only) per annum.

¶23

(c) The respondent shall be permitted to visit the children at the Family Court Child Care Centre on all the hearing dates.

¶24

The respondent will be at liberty to seek dispensation of his appearance before the Family Court, if he is unable to appear due to unavoidable circumstances.

¶25

With the above direction, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. Connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶26

Amudha Counsel for the Petitioner Vs. S.Satheeswaran Counsel for the Respondent

¶27

Judge

¶28

Member Member To

¶29

The parties/Advocate concerned

¶30

Copy to

¶31

1.The Sub Court, Thirumangalam

¶32

2.The VI Additional Family Court, Chennai

¶33

3.The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Chennai.

¶34

4.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.

¶35

5.The Section Officer, Lok Adalat Section, High Court, Madras.+2 copies

¶36

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

¶37

SUNDER MOHAN.,J, ssa/gya

¶38

Tr.C.M.P.No.93 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.2059 of 2023

¶39

09.09.2023

¶40

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

Amudha v. S.Satheeswaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amudha v. S.Satheeswaran

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

G.Senthilkumar Vs P.Dom

Dhanam (Mother of the Deceased) Vs Union of India Owning Southern Railways

Jeeva Vs Dean Jones

Praveen Kumar Vs Balakrishnan

Padmanabhan Vs Balakrishnan

D.Sindhu Vs a.Suresh