Disposed

K.Manimaran v. M.Arunadevi

Madras HC8 Mar 2025CRL RC(MD)/722/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Lok Adalat award on a husband's revision against a Family Court maintenance order. The parties reported they had re-joined and were living together; the petitioner sought to withdraw the revision. By mutual consent the Family Court order was set aside and the revision disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Revision permitted to be withdrawn; M.C.No.122/2022 order set aside by consent; court fee refundable.

K.Manimaran Vs M.Arunadevi — Maintenance and Alimony | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, MADURAI

¶2

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625023

¶3

Saturday the 8th day of March 2025 NATIONAL LOK ADALAT AWARD

¶4

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

¶5

Presided Over by The Honourable Mr.Justice M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶6

and

¶7

Members

¶8

Mr.S.Udhayan,District Judge(Retired) , Mrs.C.Jeya Indira Patel, Advocate

¶9

CRL RC(MD) No.722 of 2024

¶10

(Criminal Revision against the judgment and decree passed on in MC.122/2022 on the file of the Family Court, Theni)

K.Manimaran

... Petitioner

Versus

M.Arunadevi

Minor M.Lithika Sri

Rep by her mother and natural guardian M.Arunadevi, 1st Respondent herein

¶17

... Respondens

¶18

This case came up for settlement before the Lok Adalat. Both the parties present. The counsel for the appellant/s Mr.K.Saravanan and the counsel for the respondent/s M/s.Charumathi are present. After mutual discussion, negotiation, mediation and conciliation between both parties and with the assistance of the Bench, both sides consented for settlement.

¶19

AWARD

¶20

The husband, aggrieved by the order of the Family Court, Theni District, in M.C.No.122 of 2022 dated 23.05.2024 has preferred this Criminal Revision.

¶21

2.Today (ie., 08.03.2025), the petitioner/husband as well as the respondent/wife are present. Both parties have resolved their disputes and they report that they have re-joined and are living together happily.

¶22

3.In view of the above circumstances, the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the criminal revision.

¶23

4.We have affirmed the said positio with the respondent/wife and she confirms the same. In view of the above, the order made in M.C.No.122 of 2022 on the file of the Family Court, Theni is hereby set aside by the consent of both the parties.

¶24

5.This Criminal Revision Case is disposed of, with the above terms.

¶25

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

¶26

K.Manimaran

¶27

S/o.P.Kasi, South Street, Ayyampatti Village, Markkaiyankottai Post, Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District.

¶28

Counsel for the petitioner

¶29

M.Arunadevi

¶30

W/o.K.Manimaran, Door No.83, Ward No.3, North Street, Pallavarayanpatti Village, Pannaipuram Post, Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District.

¶31

Counsel for the Respondents

¶32

This Lok Adalat award is passed in terms of the above settlement.

¶33

The full Court fee paid shall be refunded to the appellant in the manner provided under Section 69-A of the Tamilnadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 and the Court Fees Act, 1870 as provided for under sub Sec.1 of Section 21 r/w 25 of LSA Act 1987 as amended in 1994.

¶34

The Original of the award shall be place in the court record and copy of the award, kept with High Court Legal Services Committee and one copy each is furnished to both parties free of cost.

¶35

In agreement of the above, both parties and their counsel have affixed their signatures/ thumb impressions in presence of the Lok Adalat Bench admitting the terms and today conditions and accordingly, the award is passed.

JUDGE

MEMBER

MEMBER

To: The Parties/Advocate concerned Copy To

¶40

Family Court, Theni.

¶41

The Officer-in-Charge, High Court Legal Services Committee, Madurai.

¶42

The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶43

Typed By SUBATHRA PA To The Hon'ble Judges

¶44

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

K.Manimaran v. M.Arunadevi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Manimaran v. M.Arunadevi

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

D.Pushparani, Vs the District Collector

R.Chithra Sugirtha Santhi Vs The Secretary to Government

P.Mahalakshmi Vs the Chief Secretary to Govt.

Mrs.S.Nargis Banu Vs Mr.J.Maboob Sheriff

The Branch Manager, Vs Shanmuga Rajesh

The Branch Manager Vs S.Nargunam