Allowed¶22

Mrs.Mangalam Subramanian Vani v. Mr.Jayaraman Anand Kumar

Madras HC9 Jul 2026A/5726/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Additional documents application allowed subject to proof, admissibility and relevancy; iCloud downloaded photographs and pendrive photos/videos marked as documents No.22 and No.23; objections based on interests of minor children; underlying OP No. 689 of 2023 is a custody petition by father who, by affidavit dated 04.07.2024, did not press permanent custody and sought visitation; no costs ordered; Madras High Court; Dr.Justice A.D.Maria Clete.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed: applicant permitted to receive additional documents No.22 (downloaded iCloud photos) and No.23 (pendrive containing photos and videos) on her side, subject to proof, admissibility and relevancy; no costs. ¶22

Mrs.Mangalam Subramanian Vani Vs Mr.Jayaraman Anand Kumar — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

A.No.5726 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 09-07-2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶5

A No. 5726 of 2024 IN OP NO. 689 OF 2023

¶6

Mrs.Mangalam Subramanian Vani W/o.Jayaraman Anand Kumar, K-404, Ceebros Grayshott, Bishop Gardens Extension, R.A.Puram, Chennai - 600 028.

¶7

..Applicant(s)

¶8

¶9

Mr.Jayaraman Anand Kumar S/o.P.Jayaraman, 302, Srinidhi Apartments, 7/4, Annai Nagamai Street, Mandaiveli, Chennai - 600 028.

¶10

..Respondent(s)

¶11

PRAYER: To receive the downloaded photos from the i cloud and also the pendrive containing photos and videos of the Respondent/Petitioner which are objectionable to the interests of my minor children as well as Applicant/ Respondent furnished as additional document No.22 and 23 respectively on the side of the Applicant/Respondent.

¶12

For Applicant(s): Ms.R.V.Rukmani For Respondent(s): Ms.Ramapriya Gopalakrishnan

¶13

1/4

¶14

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

¶15

A.No.5726 of 2024

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This application has been filed to receive the downloaded photos from the i cloud and also the pendrive containing photos and videos of the Respondent/Petitioner which are objectionable to the interests of my minor children as well as Applicant/ Respondent furnished as additional document No.22 and 23 respectively on the side of the Applicant/Respondent.

¶18

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant who submits that the aforesaid documents are objectionable to the interests of the minor children and the applicant and non-marking of the same will cause serious prejudice to the case and more particularly to the interest of the minor children and hence, sought for allowing this application.

¶19

Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, contended that the aforesaid petition has been filed seeking custody of his minor daughters and he has also filed an affidavit dated 04.07.2024 stating that he do not wish to press for the relief of permanent custody and would be content with the visitation. However, the applicant has filed this application to produce certain photos and videos only to prejudice the proceedings and have no bearing in this point of time and the balance 2/4

¶20

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

¶21

A.No.5726 of 2024 of convenience is in favour of making a permanent arrangement for visitation and thus sought for dismissing this application.

¶22

Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this application and the facts and circumstances of the case, this application is allowed subject to proof, admissibility and relevancy. No costs.

¶23

09-07-2026

¶24

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶25

¶26

3/4

¶27

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

¶28

A.No.5726 of 2024

¶29