← Library
Madras High CourtA/4103/2019ordered

M.Jayalatha And Another v. S.Rajalakshmi And Another

2019-06-25Honourable Mr Justice R. Subramanian7 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN A.No.4103 of 2019 in O.P.No.136 of 2016 In the matter of Indian Succession Act XXXIX of 1925 and In the matter of certain securities/debts belonging to deceased Kaveriselvan under Part X of the Indian Succession Act 1.M.Jayalatha, Female/Age 38 Rep.by its her power of attorney S.Muthiah, Residing at No.B3, Hemapriya Apartments No.8, Circular Road, United India Colony Kodamabakkam, Chennai 600 024 2.Minor Vikram, Rep.by mother and Guardian M.Jayalatha Rep.by its her Power of attorney S.Muthiah, Residing at No.B3 Hemapriya Apartments, No.8, Circular Road, United India Colony, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024 ...Applicant/Petitioners -vs-

1.S.Rajalakshmi, W/o.K.Karikalan, No.1/560, M.C.N.Nagar Extension, Thuraipakkam, Chennai 600 96 2.B.Kallikudi Karikalan, S/o.Bodi, No.1/560, M.C.N Nagar Extension, Thuraipakkam, Chennai 600 096

...Respondents/Respondents

Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit the Applicants 1 & 2 to contest the case in O.P.No.136/2016 through their authorized power of attorney/Father namely S.Muthiah, S/o.K.Sankaralingam, Hindu aged 71 years, residing at B-3, II Floor, Hemapriya Apartments, No.8, Circular Road, United India Colony, Kodamabkkam, Chennai 600 024 to the Judges summons. This application coming on this day before this court for hearing the court made the following order:

The applicants seek permission to prosecute the proceedings in O.P.No.136/2016 through an authorized agent.

2. The 1 st applicant had executed a power of attorney on 29.12.2004 in the name of S.Muthiah which has been registered as Doc No.16/2005. Live Certificate has also been produced to show that the 1 st applicant is alive.

3. In view of the same, this petition is allowed permitting the applicants to prosecute the main Original Petition through their power agent S.Muthiah.

Sd/.R.S.M.J 25.06.2019 //Certified to be a true copy// Dated this the day of 2019.

R.s/02.07.2019 COURT OFFICER From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) DATED, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN A.No. 4777 of 2012 in O.P.No.637 of 2012 In the Matter of Guardians And Wards Act, 1890, And In the matter of Nishita

Minor, Shri.Ashok Surana S/o. Shri Kanhiaya Lal Surana R/o. No.21-1, Old No.50, th Street, R Block, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040.

..Applicant/Petitioner Vs Kavitha Jain D/o. Shri Gajraj Jain W/o. Sh.Ashok Surana R/o. C-484, Yojna Vihar, 1 st floor, New Delhi 110092..

...Respondent/Respondent

Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant visitation rights to the petitioner to visit the minor child namely Nishita 7 years old, who is presently in Delhi, weekly once on Saturdays or Sundays.

This application coming on this day before this Court for hearing, the court made the following order:- This application has been filed seeking visitation rights to the petitioner to visit the minor child Nishitha. The Applicant is the father of the child. The marriage between the parents was terminated by a decree of divorce granted by the Family Court at New Delhi on 30.07.2012. It is also admitted by the parties as well as the learned counsel appearing for the parties that an arrangement regarding visitation has been made by the Family Court at New Delhi. The applicant herein has moved to the Family Court at New Delhi

complaining of dis-obedience of the order passed regarding visitation by the respondent wife. Those proceedings are pending before the Court in New Delhi. By an order dated 29.08.2017 this Court has directed the Registrar General to forward the copy of the order to the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court with a request to the Family Court at New Delhi to issue notice to the petitioner and respondent to appear along with the child before the Family Court. The Family Court was required to ascertain the wishes of the child and also have a discussion with the petitioner and respondent and forward the report to this Court. Persuant to the said direction, the Principal Family Judge at New Delhi had interactions with the child as well as the parents.

The report of the Principal Judge, Family Court at New Delhi has been placed before this Court. A reading of the report as well shows that the child has dis-inclination to meet the applicant. In view of the said report as well as the fact that the applicant has been favoured with visitation rights by the Family Court at New Delhi, I do not deem it necessary for granting any further visitation right. Hence, Application No.4777 of 2012 is dismissed. It is stated by the respondent that she has filed the application to set aside the ex-parte order in diary Nos.50845 and 50846 of 2019.

2.Registry is directed to number the applications if it is otherwise in order and post on 25.04.2019.

Sd/.R.S.M.J 12.04.2019 //Certified to be a true copy// Dated this the day of 2019.

R.s/25.06.2019 COURT OFFICER From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format.