Allowed

Smt. Kadari Suma, v. Sri Borra Ramesh

Telangana HC17 Apr 2023CRP/903/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the civil revision petition. It set aside the order dismissing the interim maintenance application, permitting the petitioner-wife to withdraw that application with liberty to file a fresh application under appropriate law for appropriate relief regarding maintenance for the minor son.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; petitioner allowed to withdraw interim application and file fresh application under appropriate law for relief.

Smt. Kadari Suma, Vs Sri Borra Ramesh — Maintenance and Alimony | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁷ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{A.ABHISHEKREDDY}

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITION^{NO: 903 OF 2023}

¶7

Petition Under Article 227 Constitution of^{lndiaagainst the Orderdated} o\to3t22 in l.A.No. 131 0t 2021^{in F.C.O.P.NO. 366 0f 2019 0n the file of the court} of the Judge, Family Court-cum-lll^{AdditionalDistrictJudge' Warangal.}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt. Kadari Suma, Wo. Borra^{Ramesh, D/o. Kadari Sudhakar, Age.30 years'} Occ. House Wife,^{Fl/o. H.N o.9-11611} ,^{Banda Ankus Wada,Huzurabad,} Karimnagar District.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

Sri Borra Ramesh, S/o.^{Durgaiah, Age.35 years, Occ. Employee (Police} Constable) Rl/o.H.No.2-1 60,^{Yellapur Village, HasanparthyMandal,} Hanumakonda District.

¶13

...RESPONDENT

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶15

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{praying that in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High court maybe pleasedto Stay} the FCOP No.366 of 2019, on^{the file of Judge Family court cum lll Additional} District Judge at warangal^{presently beforethe Honourable Family courtJudge, at} Hanumakonda District

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRl. K BUCHI BABU}

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI G.^{ANILKIRAN KUMAR}

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

TI{E HON'BLIi SRI JUS'IICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

¶20

CIVIL REVISION PIITITION No.903 of 2023

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

Questioning^{the orderdated 08.03.2022passed} by the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-llI Additional District Judgc, Warangal,, dismissing I.A.No.13l of 2021 in F.C.O.P.No.366 of 2019, filed by the petitioner seeking to direct the respondent to pay maintenance to the son of the parlies i.e., Master Borra Sriharsha, S/o Sri Borra Ramesh, @ Rs.30,000/- per mensem, the present Civil Revision^petition has been flled

¶23

After arguing the case at length, when it was pointed out to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that I.A.No.l31 of 2021 in FCOP.No.366 of 20t9 seeking maintenance has been filed by the petitioner-wife under Section 24 ol' the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, only for granting maintenance to Master Borra Sriharsha, S/o Sri Borra Ramesh @^{Rs.30,000/-per mcnsem, and that there is} no^prayer in the said LA.No.l3l of 2021 seeking any maintenance to the petitioner-rvif'e, the learned counsel for the petitioner-wife has

¶24

¶25

AAR, J C.R.P.No 903 ot 2023

¶26

¶27

prayed this Court to permit the petitioner-wife to withdraw the

¶28

said I.A.No.13l of 2021 in FCOP.No.366 of 2019 with leave to file an appropriate application under the appropriate provisions of law for appropriate reliefand set aside the order under revision dated 08.03.2022 passed by the lower Court in I.A.No.l31 of 2021in F.C.O.P.No.366 of 2019.

¶29

Having,regard to the above, the order under revision dated 08.03.2022 is set aside and I.A.No.13l of 2021 stands withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application/O.P. under an appropriate provision of law before the appropriate Court. On such application being filed by the petitioner, the lower Court shall consider the same on its own rnerits without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Courl in the present order or the order under revision dated 08.03.2022 in I.A.No.13l of 2021 in F.C.O.P.No.366 of 2019. However, if any fresh application/O.P. is filed, the respondent is entitled to raise all the legally tenable objections as available under law

¶30

I,\AR, J C R.P N*,) 903 ,)12023

¶31

¶32

¶33

Accorclingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowcd to

¶34

the extent indicated above.

¶35

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶36

closed. There shall be no ordcr as to costs

¶37

SD/- G.SIREESHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 The J-udge, Family Court-cum-lll Additional District Judge, Warangal 2.> One One CC CC to SRl. to SRI K- G ANIL KIRAN BUCHI BABU Advocate KUMAR Advocate [OPUC][OPUC] 4 Two CD Copies KKS

HIGH COURT

DATED:1710412023

c-
-
.b__-
cE

ORDER

CRP.No.903 of 2023

ALLOWING OF THE CRP WITHOUT COSTS

¶48

b
tO {

Smt. Kadari Suma, v. Sri Borra Ramesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kadari Suma, v. Sri Borra Ramesh

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

Syed Lateef Ali Azmi Vs A.P. Electricity Board

K. Janga Chary Vs Smt v. Sunitha

Sd. S Jani, Vs Sri Munisekhar

P. Janardhan Reddy, State of Tamil Nadu, Vs the Managing Director Tamilnadu Handlooms, Chenni, and 1

M. Maruthi Sharma, Adilabad. Vs the Member Secretary, Aptwreis, Hyderabad and 2 Others

R.R.Prasad,Girimajipet,Warangal Vs the Hon`Ble Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court, Warangal and Another