Husband appealed the dismissal of his divorce petition for desertion while in arrears of monthly maintenance ordered by the Family Court. Relying on Supreme Court guidelines, the High Court held he could not prosecute the appeal without paying and dismissed it.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.M.A.No.1717 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.12.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
C.M.A.No.1717 of 2021
S. Kumaresan
... Appellant
Vs.
G. Devikala
... Respondent
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984, read with Order XLI Rule (1) of C.P.C., 1908, as amended against the order and decreetal dated 20.12.2019 passed by the V Additional Family Court, Chennai, in H.M.O.P.No.923 of 2019.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Thiagarajan
For Respondent : M/s.E.Angayarkanni
Page 1/6
C.M.A.No.1717 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by J. Nisha Banu, J)
The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the order dated 20.12.2019, dismissing O.P.No.923 of 2019 filed by the appellant/husband for divorce on the ground of desertion, passed by the learned V Additional Principal Judge, V Additional Family Court, Chennai.
Page 2/6
C.M.A.No.1717 of 2021
"In the event that there is any failure on the part of the respondent to comply with the order for deposit of arrears and month to month installments, it will be open to the appellant to apply before the Family Court to get the defence of the respondent struck off".
Vs. Neha) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court had passed a detailed judgment giving certain Guidelines/ Directions on Maintenance to be followed and in the said decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows:-
"The Court concluded that if there was non-payment of interim maintenance, the defence of the respondent is liable to be struck off, and the appeal filed by the appellant-wife can be allowed, without hearing the respondent".
Page 3/6
C.M.A.No.1717 of 2021
till date as directed by the Family Court. Therefore, we can not allow the appellant/husband to prosecute the appeal without paying the maintenance.
appellant/husband to prosecute the appeal without paying the maintenance. Therefore, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
(J.N.B, J.) (R.S.V., J.) 05.12.2024
asi
Page 4/6
C.M.A.No.1717 of 2021
To
The V Additional Family Court, Chennai.
Page 5/6
C.M.A.No.1717 of 2021
J. NISHA BANU, J. and R. SAKTHIVEL, J.
asi
C.M.A.No.1717 of 2021
05.12.2024
Page 6/6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a husband in arrears of court-ordered maintenance could be permitted to prosecute his appeal against dismissal of his divorce petition without paying the maintenance.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kaushalya Vs. Mukesh JainRelied on¶4
(2020) 17 SCC 822 · Who else cites this
Rajnesh Vs. NehaRelied on¶5
AIR 2021 SC 569 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
S. Kumaresan
G. Devikala
J. Nisha Banu
R. Sakthivel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
J. Nisha Banu and R. Sakthivel
Parties & counsel
