Blog

Madras High Court

In this case, the petitioner had filed a case of divorce in trial court and the petitioner’s wife claimed for maintenance in the same trial court. The petition in Madras High Court was filed by the petitioner and the petitioner’s wife against the said order and also a contempt petition against the learned court. The case was G.P. Bhaskar V/S Sumathi filed in HMOP.No.2726 of 2013 in the I Additional court in Chennai. The case was presided by Mr. Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN of Madras High Court.

Facts of the Case

• The petitioner filed the petition for divorce in 2013 on the grounds of cruelty and desertion in the HMOP.No.2726 of 2013 in the I Additional court in Chennai. The case was pending for several years and then the petitioner filed a civil revision petition before Madras High Court and then HC directed the learned trial court to dispose the divorce court on or before 31.03.2017.
• The petitioner’s wife also filed interlocutory application for the maintenance in which she asked interim monthly maintenance of Rs.30,000/- and also seeking Rs.30,000/- for the court expenses. The trial court allowed the maintenance petition and the petitioner was directed to give Rs.10,000/- for the wife and Rs.5,000/- for the daughter as monthly expenses and also ordered to pay Rs.20,000/- for the litigation expenses.
• Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned court both the petitioner and the petitioner’s wife appealed before the court in 2017. The case was dismissed by Madras High Court in 2021.
• In 2022 petitioner again filed a petition against the presiding officer of the family court.

JUDGMENT

The Madras High Court said that it is a clear abuse to the process of the learned court. The court by giving reference of section 20.CC Act, 1971 said that the petitioner first filed an appeal in 2017 and after the disposal of the said petition in 2021 petitioner again filed a petition in 2022 of contempt of court. The court said that divorce in 2017, so if the petitioner wanted to file the case of contempt of court he should have filed it within 1 year when the divorce was granted. It was also said that the petition which was filed against the presiding officer was presiding the said court from 2021 and the divorce was granted in 2017 by another presiding officer. So the current presiding cannot be in the question.

The court also imposed the fine of Rs.50,000 on the petitioner for abusing the process of the trail court.

   “PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY NAMRATA SINGH

Click to view Judgment