G.Ramesh Babu v. R.Radhika
2025:MHC:2079
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI AND CRP NO. 3500 OF 2025,CRP NO. 3498 OF 2025
1. G.Ramesh Babu S/o. K. Govindrajulu Petitioner(s) Vs
1. R.Radhika D/o. Ramadass Respondent(s) CRP No. 3500 of 2025
1. G.Ramesh Babu S/o. K. Govindrajulu Petitioner(s) Vs
1. R.Radhika D/o. Ramadass, No.177, KRN Complex, Velachery Main Road, Selaiyur, Chennai - 600 073.
Respondent(s)
CRP No. 3498 of 2025
1. G.Ramesh Babu S/o. K. Govindrajulu Petitioner(s) Vs
1. R.Radhika D/o. Ramadass Respondent(s) PRAYER To setaside the order dated 09.07.2025 passed in I.A.No.11 of 2025 in O.P.No.3490 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Judge Family Court at Chennai and pass such other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper and thus render justice.
CRP No. 3500 of 2025 PRAYER To setaside the order dated 09.07.2025 passed in I.A.No.13 of 2025 in O.P.No.3490 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Judge Family Court at Chennai and pass such other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper and thus render justice.
CRP No. 3498 of 2025 PRAYER To setaside the order dated 09.07.2025 passed in I.A.No.12 of 2025 in O.P.No.3490 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Judge Family Court at Chennai and pass such other orders as this Court may deem fit. In all petitions For Petitioner(s):
Mr.J. Saravana Vel For Respondent(s):
Ms.Vasudha Thiagarajan
COMMON ORDER These revisions had been filed by the petitioner/husband, who is facing proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the respondent/wife. Independently, seeking dissolution of the marriage O.P.No.3980 of 2019 has been filed by the petitioner/husband.
2. This Court, by order dated 27.01.2025, in Tr.CMP.Nos.59 and 60 of 2025, had directed the Family Court to dispose of the above original petitions on or before 15.04.2025.
3. Heard Mr.J.Saravana Vel, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Vasudha Thiagarajan, learned counsel for the respondents.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the parties have already adduced evidence and the judgment was reserved and about to be delivered on 04.06.2025, when the respondent/wife came out with three applications for reopening, recalling RW1/petitioner/husband, and also for filing additional documents, namely bank statements reflecting TASMAC entries. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent has been in the habit of repeatedly taking out applications and protracting the proceedings and despite the direction of this Court, for expeditious disposal of the proceedings, the respondent has not cooperated. The learned counsel would further state that the document now sought to be marked is to establish that the
petitioner is an alcoholic, which does not in any way serve the respondent's purpose in seeking restitution of conjugal rights.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner therefore states that it is a clear abuse of process and therefore, prays not to entertain the applications.
6. The learned counsel for the respondent/wife states that the respondent only wants to mark the documents that were admittedly given by the petitioner/husband, during cross-examination. In this regard, she would draw my attention to paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit of the respondent in the interlocutory application, the order of which is now impugned in this revision petition. In paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit, the revision petitioner had admitted that he had filed 6 bank statements before the Judicial Magistrate in Crl.A.No.3656 of 2022 in MC.No.7 of 2014 and further that these documents were also shown to him during cross-examination when he was examined as RW1 in the present proceedings and that questions were also put regarding the said bank statements.
In paragraph 7, I find that the petitioner/husband has also stated that these bank statements have been filed by him, along with the affidavit of assets and liabilities in IA.No.15 of 2025 in OP.No.3980 of 2019. It is therefore contended by the respondent that the documents are already before the Court and there is no need to file them again.
final disposal of the original petitions.
7.The learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, states that he may not have any serious objections since the petitioner himself has admitted to these documents in the assets and liabilities statements filed in IA.No.15 of 2025. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that under the guise of marking the documents, the trial should not be reopened, which would only further protract the proceedings.
8. In the light of the above, I am inclined to dispose of the civil revision petitions in the following manner,
1. The orders in IA.Nos.11, 12 and 13 of 2025 are hereby confirmed.
2. The bank statements that have been filed by the petitioner/husband along with the assets and liabilities in IA.No.15 of 2025 in OP.No.3980 of 2019 shall be received and given exhibits numbers and marked in the petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the respondent/wife.
3. The Family Court shall not permit any fresh oral evidence, either chief or cross examination, and after marking the bank statements, any further arguments, if any, may be heard and the Family Court shall pronounce judgment on or before 08.09.2025, without seeking further extension of time.
No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed.
05-08-2025 Note: Issue order copy on 25.08.2025.
gd Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To The Principal Family Court, Chennai.
P.B.BALAJI J.
gd AND CRP NO. 3500 OF 2025,CRP NO. 3498 OF 05-08-2025