Deepak Devarajan v. v.Jeyasudha

Madras HC6 Nov 2025CRL RC/1759/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintenance revision dismissed - Deepak Devarajan v. V. Jeyasudha & Minor D. Siddharth, Crl.R.C.No.1759 of 2025 & Crl.M.P.No.17599 of 2025, Madras HC, 06.11.2025, T.V.THAMILSELVI J.; filed under S.438 r/w 442 B.N.S Act; challenges order dated 21.08.2023 in M.C.No.317 of 2020 of I Additional Family Court, Chennai; Rs.18,000/- p.m. maintenance confirmed (Rs.8,000/- wife + Rs.10,000/- minor child); based on salary slip Ex.P.5, earning capacity, necessities, medical treatment; arrears payable within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioner; the Family Court maintenance order dated 21.08.2023 was confirmed, and the petitioner was directed to pay the arrears of maintenance within twelve weeks, failing which the first respondent may take action per law. ¶44-46

Deepak Devarajan Vs v.Jeyasudha — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶44-46

Issue for consideration

Whether the Criminal Revision should be allowed and the order dated 21.08.2023 of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai in M.C.No.317 of 2020 (Rs.18,000/- monthly maintenance) set aside.

¶15-17

Court's answer

On perusal of the impugned order, the Lower Court ordered maintenance only after considering the petitioner's income evidenced by his salary slip (Ex.P.5).

¶34-35

Ratio / Principle

After considering all aspects, the earning capacity of both parties, the respondents' requirement for basic necessities and the medical treatment of the first respondent, the Family Court's order needs no interference and is perfectly valid.

¶42-43

Key takeaways

The order passed by the I Additional Family Court, Chennai on 21.08.2023 is confirmed; the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed and the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.ratio¶44-46
The petitioner is directed to pay the arrears of maintenance within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order, failing which the first respondent is at liberty to take action against him in the manner known to law.ratio¶47-48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (T.V. Thamilselvi, J.) dismissed a criminal revision filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of the B.N.S Act by a husband seeking to set aside the order dated 21.08.2023 of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai in M.C.No.317 of 2020, which directed him to pay Rs.18,000/- per month as maintenance - Rs.8,000/- to his wife (first respondent) and Rs.10,000/- to their minor son (second respondent). The Family Court had fixed the amount after examining the petitioner's salary slip (Ex.P.5), the earning capacity of both parties, the respondents' basic necessities and the first respondent's medical treatment. The petitioner argued that his wife was employed and able to maintain herself, that he alone supported his aged heart-patient father and mother, and that he had personal loans to repay, though he had paid interim-maintenance arrears. Holding the Family Court order 'perfectly valid' and in need of no interference, the High Court confirmed it, dismissed the revision, closed the connected miscellaneous petition, and directed payment of all maintenance arrears within twelve weeks, failing which the first respondent may enforce per law.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 06.11.2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶5

Crl.R.C.No.1759 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.17599 of 2025

Deepak Devarajan

... Petitioner

Vs.

V. Jeyasudha 2. Minor D. Siddharth ... Respondent

¶10

PRAYER : This petition is filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of B.N.S Act to allow the Revision and thereby set aside the order dated 21.08.2023 made in M.C.No.317 of 2020 on the file of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai and pass orders.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.A.R.Nixon For Respondents : Mr.S. Arokia Mani Raj

¶12

1/6

¶13

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

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed to allow the Revision and

¶16

thereby set aside the order dated 21.08.2023 made in M.C.No.317 of 2020 on the

¶17

file of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai.

¶18

2. The facts of the case is that the petitioner marred the first respondent on

¶19

27.11.2014 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. Out of the said wedlock one male

¶20

child was born to them. Thereafter, there was some misunderstanding between

¶21

them, due to which the first respondent left the matrimonial home and residing with her aged parents and filed M.C.No.317 of 2020 before the I Additional

¶22

Family Chennai and the same was allowed, wherein a direction was issued to the

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.18,000/- as monthly maintenance. Challenging the

¶26

same the petitioner has filed the present revision.

¶27

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the first respondent is

¶28

employed and able to maintain herself. He further submits he was the only earning

¶29

member in his family and he has to take care of his aged father who is a heart

¶30

patient and his mother. Further the petitioner has to repay the personal loans.

¶31

Inspite of the above financial crisis he paid the arrears of interim maintenance as

¶32

ordered by the Court. Hence, prays to dismiss this petition.

¶33

4. Heard both sides and perused the materials on record.

¶34

5. On the perusal of the impugned order it reveals that the Lower Court only

¶35

after considering the income of the petitioner/salary slip/Ex.P.5 has ordered the

¶36

maintenance amount. Further more after considering all the aspects and earning

¶37

3/6

¶38

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

¶39

capacity of both parties and the requirement of the respondents for their basic necessities and medical treatment of the first respondent, the petitioner was

¶40

directed to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/-p.m to the first respondent and Rs.10,000/- to

¶41

the second respondent towards the monthly maintenance. This Court is of the

¶42

view that the order passed by the learned Judge needs no interference as the same

¶43

is perfectly valid.

¶44

8. For the foregoing reasons the order passed by the learned I Additional

¶45

Family Chennai on 21.08.2023 is confirmed and this Criminal Revision case is