Saranya Kondalraj v. D.Arun Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26.03.2024 Coram THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI C.M.A. No.4488 of 2019 1.Saranya Kondalraj 2.Minor Prajul Ramana rep. By his natural guardian mother Saranya Kondalraj .. Appellants vs D.Arjun Prasad .. Respondent Appeal filed under Section 19 of The Family Courts Act, 1984 against the judgement and decree made in I.A. No.256 of 2018 in H.M.O.P. No.66 of 2018 dated 04.12.2018 on the file of the Principal District Court, Villupuram.
For Appellants :
Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan For Respondent :
Mr.K.Gajendran
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.SUNDAR, J.] Captioned 'Civil Miscellaneous Appeal' [hereinafter 'CMA' for the sake of brevity] has been filed assailing an 'order of 1/4
pendente lite maintenance/interim maintenance order' [hereinafter 'impugned order' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity] made under Section 24 of 'The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [25 of 1955]' {hereinafter 'HM Act' for the sake of brevity}.
2. This Court vide a detailed common judgment/order dated 21.03.2024 in S.Menaka v. K.S.K.Nepolian Socraties and other Madras High Court} and 2024 Live Law (Mad) 126 inter alia held that appeals against pendente lite maintenance/interim maintenance orders under Section 24 of HM Act are not maintainable but a revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India would lie and preserved the rights of the appellants for preferring revision while giving closure to such CMAs.
3. In the aforementioned scenario, without dilating further on maintainability, suffice to say that captioned CMA will also be governed by S.Menaka v. K.S.K.Nepolian Socraties and other cases {Batch} reported in 2024:MHC:1405 and 2024 Live Law (Mad) 126 i.e., there would be closure and preservation of rights as in S.Menaka v. K.S.K.Nepolian Socraties and other cases {Batch} reported in 2024:MHC:1405 and 2024 Live Law (Mad) 126. 2/4
4. Ergo, the sequitur is captioned CMA is disposed of as not maintainable/closed albeit with preservation of rights in the aforementioned manner i.e., as in Menaka Principle.
5. Though obvious, it is made clear that in this order, this Court has not expressed any view or opinion on merits qua captioned CMA.
6. If learned counsel on record for appellants in the captioned CMA requests for return of certified copy qua impugned order, the same shall be returned forthwith to learned counsel on record for the appellants under due acknowledgment.
7. There shall be no order as to costs.
(M.S.,J.) (K.G.T.,J.) 26.03.2024 Index : Yes / No mmi To The Principal District Court, Villupuram.
3/4
M.SUNDAR, J., and K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., mmi C.M.A. No.4488 of 2019 26.03.2024 4/4