Madras High Court
Dhatchnamoorthy vs Rajeshwari on 1 April, 2024
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.04.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024
in
Crl.RC.SR.No.17685 of 2024
Dhatchnamoorthy ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. Rajeshwari
2. Monisha (Minor)
Rep. By her mother and
Natural Guardian Rajeshwari ...Respondents
Prayer in Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024: Petition filed under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the criminal
revision petition against MP.No.844 of 2022 in M.C.No.325 of 2018 dated
14.07.2023 on the file of V Additional Family Court, Chennai.
Prayer in Crl.RC.SR.No.17685 of 2024: Criminal Revision case filed
under Section 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records relating to the
case in MP.No.844 of 2022 in MC.No.325 of 2018 dated 14.07.2023 on the
file of V Additional Family Court, Chennai and quash the same as far as the
respondents is concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.I.Javid Akbar
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024
ORDER
This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the criminal revision petition against the order dated 14.07.2023 made in MP.No.844 of 2022 in M.C.No.325 of 2018 on the file of V Additional Family Court, Chennai.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that, the marriage between the petitioner/husband and the 1st respondent/wife was solemnized on 15.11.2013 as per the Hindu rites and customs and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with one female child/the 2nd respondent. Whileso, due to some matrimonial dispute, they got separated. In such circumstances, in the month of May 2022, the respondents lodged a complaint against the petitioner and only during the inquiry, the petitioner came to know that the respondents have filed a petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. in M.C.No.325 of 2018 on the file of the V Additional Family Court, Chennai, claiming a monthly maintenance of Rs.25,000/- each and the trial court without proper adjudication and without hearing the petitioner had mechanically passed an exparte order dated 22.03.2019, directing the 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024 petitioner to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/-each to the respondents. However, the petitioner had not received any court summons and thereby, he was not able to appear before the Court. Hence, the petitioner filed a set aside petition in MP.No.844 of 2022 in MC.No.325 of 2018, seeking to set aside the above said exparte order and the same was allowed by the trial court vide order dated 14.07.2023. However, the trial court while allowing the set aside petition directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.5,10,000/- to the respondents towards arrears of maintenance from 22.03.2019 till 14.07.2023 within a period of one month from 14.07.2023. Challenging the same, the petitioner has come up with this petition to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the above revision against the order dated 14.07.2023 made in MP.No.844 of 2022 in M.C.No.325 of 2018.
3. Though very many grounds have been raised, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner is ready to pay the entire amount of Rs.5,10,000/- ordered by the trial court in MP.No.844 of 2022. Hence, this Court may permit the petitioner to pay the said amount within a 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024 period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon such payment being made by the petitioner, the ex parte order may be set aside and the court below may restore the main case in M.C.No.325 of 2018.
4. Since no adverse order is being passed against the respondents, notice to the respondents is dispensed with.
5. There is no dispute about the marriage between the petitioner and the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent is the wife and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with the 2nd respondent herein. It is to be pointed out that it is the duty of the husband to maintain his wife and child and the comforts, which were available to the spouse and child should not be lost due to the friction between the warring parties. Only to that end, Section 125 Cr.P.C. was brought into the statute. In such a backdrop, it becomes the duty of the husband to maintain his wife and child.
6. A perusal of the materials available on record particularly the 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024 impugned order reveals that, the respondents have filed a maintenance case in M.C.No.325 of 2018, claiming a monthly maintenance of Rs.25,000/- each and the trial court vide exparte order dated 22.03.2019, ordered for a monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/-each to the respondents, aggrieved by which, the petitioner filed a set aside petition in MP.No.844 of 2022 and the trial court while allowing the said petition directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.5,10,000/- to the respondents within a period of one month from 14.07.2023.
7. Though the petitioner claim that he had not received any court summons and thereby, he was not able to appear before the Court, however, it is evident from records that notices were sent to the petitioner and the same were returned with endorsements such as “unclaimed”, “intimation delivered”, “door locked” and “left without instruction”. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that only during the inquiry pursuant to the complaint given by the 1st respondent, he came to know about the proceedings in MC and that is the reason for the exorbitant delay of 1169 days delay in filing the set aside petition cannot be sustained and, the trial 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024 court only on sympathetical grounds have allowed the set aside petition filed by the petitioner in MP.No.844 of 2022 with a condition to pay a sum of Rs.5,10,000/- to the respondents, towards the arrears of maintenance, which was not complied with by the petitioner till date. Without complying the order of the trial court, filing the above revision against the said order along with this condone delay petition is wholly unsustainable.
8. However, in view of the fair submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case directs the petitioner to pay the amount ordered by the trial court vide order dated 14.07.2023 made in MP.No.844 of 2022 in M.C.No.325 of 2018 to the 1st respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the trial court is at liberty to recover the amount towards arrears of maintenance from the petitioner in the manner known to law. Upon such payment being made by the petitioner, the trial court shall restore the main case in MC.No.325 of 2018 within a period of four months from the date of production of proof of payment of amount ordered, after affording opportunity to the parties. 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024
9. With the above direction, this Criminal Miscellaneous petition stands dismissed and thereby, the Criminal revision case is rejected at the SR stage itself.
01.04.2024
skt
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order : Yes/No
NCC : Yes/No
To
The V Additional Family Court,
Chennai
7/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
skt
Crl.MP.No.5859 of 2024
in
Crl.RC.SR.No.17685 of 2024
01.04.2024
8/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis