← Library
Madras High CourtCRP/3097/2015dismissed

Vijayarani v. Manavalan

2016-06-21Honourable Mr Justice C. T. Selvam4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.06.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Civil Revision Petition (PD) No.3097 of 2015 Vijayarani W/o.Manavalan ... Petitioner vs Manavalan S/o.Ranganathan ... Respondent Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order of learned Judge, Family Court, Villupuram, passed in I.A.No.8 of 2014 in I.A.No.7 of 2014 in H.M.O.P.No.10 of 2014 on 05.05.2015. For Petitioner :

Mr.N.Suresh For Respondent :

Mr.A.Rajesh Kanna *****

O R D E R

This revision arises against the order of learned Judge, Family Court, Villupuram, passed in I.A.No.8 of 2014 in I.A.No.7 of 2014 in H.M.O.P.No.10 of 2014 on 05.05.2015.

2. Respondent and petitioner are husband and wife. Respondent/husband filed a petition seeking divorce. Petitioner/wife has filed

I.A.No.7 of 2014 in H.M.O.P.No.10 of 2014 on the file of learned Judge, Family Court, Villupuram, seeking enhancement of interim maintenance in a sum of Rs.1,500/-. Upon completion of examination of witnesses on either side, the evidence was closed and the application was at the stage of arguments. In such circumstances, the petitioner/wife filed I.A.No.8 of 2014 seeking re-opening of the evidence on her side for the purpose of examination of additional witnesses. The Court below, under the impugned order, dismissed the application. Hence, this revision.

3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent.

4. In dismissing the application, the Court below has reasoned that except stating that some witnesses are to be examined to establish her case, nothing has been mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the application. No explanation has been afforded by the petitioner why she has not examined the witnesses earlier. Further, the application is pending more than seven years and at this stage, the petitioner has filed the present application only to protract the proceedings. This Court finds no error in the order under challenge.

The Civil Revision Petition, accordingly, is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 21.06.2016 Index:yes/no Internet:yes gm To The Judge, Family Court, Villupuram.

C.T.SELVAM, J gm Civil Revision Petition (PD) No.3097 of 2015 21.06.2016