Tmt.Kanagavalli v. Srinivasa Raghavan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.06.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B. RAJENDRAN CRL. R.C. No. 660 of 2009 Kanagavalli ... Petitioner/Respondent

Versus

Srinivasa Raghavan ... Respondent/Petitioner Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code against the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai, in Crl.R.P.No.11 of 2008, dated 26.02.2009, reversing the order of maintenance passed by the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Vandavasi, in M.C.No.4 of 2006, dated 29.08.2006.

For Petitioner :

No Appearance For Respondent :

Mr.V.R.Appaswamee

ORDER

The revision petitioner/wife has filed M.C.No.4 of 2006 before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Vandavasi, seeking maintenance, which was ordered at the rate of Rs.1,500/- p.m., by setting ex parte the respondent/husband. Thereafter, the husband filed Crl.R.P.No.11 of 2008 before the Sessions Court, in which, in order to give an opportunity to the husband, the order of the Lower Court was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the Lower Court for fresh disposal, thereyby, allowing the revision petition, however, on condition that the husband should pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- p.m., failing which, the revision petition will stand dismissed without any further reference to this Court. Challenging the said order, the petitioner/wife has filed the present Criminal Revision Case.

2. On 15.06.2015, when the matter was called, there was no representation for the petitioner and hence, the matter was directed to be posted under the caption, "for dismissal" next week. On 22.06.2015, when the matter was called, again there was no representation for the petitioner. With a veiw to afford one more opportunity to the petitioner, the matter was directed to be posted on 29.06.2015 under the caption, "for dismissal". Today, though, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

matter is posted under the caption, "for dismissal", there is no representation for the petitioner. However, Mr.V.R.Appaswamee, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/husband submitted that the matter has already been settled between the parties and mutual divorce has been granted and in full and final settlement an amount was paid to the revision petitioner/wife towards maintenance.

3. Recording the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/husband, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(J) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar paa To

1. The Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai.

2. The District Munsif -cum-Judicial Magistrate, Vandavasi CRL. R.C. No. 660 of 2009 RV(CO) CA(10/07/2015) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/