Remanded¶8

Vinayagam v. v.Susila

Madras HC18 Nov 2025CRL RC/1662/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court criminal revision (CRL RC 1662 of 2025) - husband challenges ex parte maintenance order of Rs.16,000/- (M.C.No.27/2023, District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram, dated 22.03.2024) favouring wife and two minor children; order set aside and matter remanded for fresh disposal conditional on deposit of Rs.3,00,000/- arrears (Rs.2,00,000/- already paid by DD); connected CRL MP 16935 of 2025 closed; no statutes or precedents engaged.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order in MC.No.27/2023 dated 22.03.2024 set aside; matter remanded to the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram for fresh disposal, conditional on the petitioner depositing Rs.3,00,000/- towards arrears of maintenance; connected miscellaneous petition (CRL MP No. 16935 of 2025) closed. ¶8

Vinayagam Vs v.Susila — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment/order dated 22.03.2024 in MC.No.27/2023 of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram - stated to have been passed without hearing the petitioner - should be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh disposal.

¶PRAYER

Court's answer

Having found that the impugned order was passed without hearing the petitioner, whose non-appearance was due to administrative transfer, this Court set aside the order passed by the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram in MC.No.27/2023 and remanded the matter to that court for fresh disposal.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

As a condition for the fresh disposal, the petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.3,00,000/- towards arrears of maintenance; the trial Judge is to take up the matter only after payment of the arrears, and if the petitioner fails to deposit, the first respondent/wife may take action against him in the manner known to law.

¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MADRAS HIGH COURT (single judge, T.V. Thamilselvi J.), CRL RC No. 1662 of 2025 with CRL MP No. 16935 of 2025, decided 18-11-2025. Criminal Revision Petition by the husband (Vinayagam) seeking to set aside the maintenance order dated 22.03.2024 in M.C. No. 27 of 2023 of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram, whereby Rs.16,000/- was directed to be paid as maintenance to the wife (V.Susila) and two minor children. The Court found the impugned order had been passed without hearing the petitioner, his non-appearance being due to administrative transfer, and noted he had already deposited Rs.2,00,000/- of the Rs.3,00,000/- arrears claimed by the respondents. The Court set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh disposal, directing the petitioner to first deposit Rs.3,00,000/- towards arrears; on failure, the first respondent/wife was left free to take action in the manner known to law. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed. No statute or precedent was cited.

¶1

CRL RC No. 1662 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 18-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶6

CRL RC No. 1662 of 2025 AND

¶7

CRL MP NO. 16935 OF 2025

¶8

VINAYAGAM S/o. Subramani, No.2, 3rd Cross Street, Rajarathinam Nagar, Thiruverkadu, Chennai - 600077.

¶9

Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

V.Susila

¶12

W/o. Vinayagam, No.2, Kasthuribai Nagar, 3rd Street, Anakkaputhur, Chennai - 600070.

¶13

2.Minor V.Barath S/o. Vinayagam,

¶14

3.Minor V.Savitha

¶15

D/o. Vinayagam, The 2nd and 3rd petitioners Rep by its Mother and Natural Guardian, Mrs V.Susila, No.2, Kasthuribai Nagar, 3rd Street, Anakkaputhur, Chennai - 600070.

¶16

Respondent(s)

¶17

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

¶18

CRL RC No. 1662 of 2025

¶19

PRAYER

¶20

To set aside the judgement order in MC.No.27/2023 order dated 22.03.2024 on the file of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram.

¶21

For Petitioner(s): K. G.Senthil Kumar A.R.Palanisamy S.Vinothkumar M.Jayavardhan For Respondent(s): Court Notice Service Awaited For R1 To R3 Private Notice Permitted - Proof Not Filed ---------M/s. R.Chitti Babu-ms/169/2004 For R1 To R3 Index To Typed Set Of Papers Filed Counter Affidavit Filed Notice Paper

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This petition is filed to call for the records relating to the 22.03.2024

¶24

made in MC.No.27 of 2023 on the file of the District Munsif Cum Judicial

¶25

Magistrate, Pallavaram and set aside the same by allowing this Criminal

¶26

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

¶27

CRL RC No. 1662 of 2025

¶28

Revision Petition.

¶29

The facts of the case is that the petitioner married the first respondent

¶30

on 11.05.2008 as per Hindu rites and customs. Out of the said wedlock two children was born to them who are second and third respondents. It is alleged that the petitioner behaved more violently with the first respondent/wife and ill-

¶31

treated her. Due to which she was thrown out from the matrimonial home. The first respondent wife filed M.C.No.27 of 2023 on the file of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram and the same was allowed on 22.03.2024 with a direction that the petitioner should pay a sum of Rs.16,000/-

¶32

as maintenance to the respondents. Aggrieved over the same the petitioner has

¶33

come up with this petition.

¶34

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Judge

¶35

without properly taking note of the income of the petitioner has passed the

¶36

impugned order. It is pertinent to note that the learned Judge ought to have

¶37

verified the assets and liabilities details of the petitioner, which was not done. It

¶38

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

¶39

CRL RC No. 1662 of 2025

¶40

is further stated that the petitioner as the summons was was not duly served to

¶41

the petitioner he remained set ex-parte. Hence, prays to allow this petition.

¶42

The learned counsel for the respondents submits that there was default

¶43

in payment of arrears of maintenance to a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and also the maintenance amount. He further submitted that the petitioner is not taking care

¶44

of the children and also failed to appear before the Court below. Hence prays to

¶45

enhance the maintenance amount.

¶46

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶47

On a perusal of records that the impugned order has been passed

¶48

without hearing the petitioner and the reasons for the non-appearance of the petitioner is due to administrative transfer, hence the petitioner was not in a position to conduct trial. It is also pertinent to note that the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as arrears of maintenance by way of DD.

¶49

However, according to respondent there was a default in payment of arrears of

¶50

maintenance to a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-

¶51

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

¶52

CRL RC No. 1662 of 2025

¶53

Considering the facts of the case the order passed by the District

¶54

Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram in MC.No.27/2023 is hereby set

¶55

aside. The matter is remanded back to the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram for fresh disposal. However, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards arrears of maintenance. The learned Judge is directed to take up the matter after payment of arrears amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. If the petitioner fails to deposit the amount the first respondent/wife is at liberty to take action against the petitioner in the manner

¶56

known to law.

¶57