Kameswari Malliga Sindhu v. Venkatraman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Kameswari Malliga Sindhu W/o. Venkat Raman, Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai 8.
..Petitioner(s) Vs Venkatraman S/o. Sanjeevi Raman, Flat No.28, Majestic Garden, Muthukumarappa Street, Arcot Road, Saligramam, Chennai 93.
..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order and decretal order passed in IA No.3 of 2023 in HMOP No.5432 of 2022 on the file of V Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai confirming the order and decree dated 30.04.2024 and dismissing the maintenance claim of the Petitioner is concerned and set aside the same and pass such necessary orders as this court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Adinarayana Rao For Respondent(s):
Ms.V.Jothi Lakshmi for Mr.R.Sankarasubbu
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order passed in IA No.3 of 2023 in OP No.5432 of 2022 dated 30.04.2024 on the file of the V Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai, the revision petitioner / wife has preferred this revision petition.
2. The revision petitioner / wife filed an application seeking to direct the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner and Rs.30,000/- to the minor child namely, Ameyaa for their monthly maintenance and also direct the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.55,000/- per year towards the school fees of the minor child. On hearing both sides, the trial judge has awarded only a sum of Rs.30,000/- as maintenance to the minor child and also directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.55,000/- as educational expenses in respect of interim maintenance. Aggrieved over the same, the revision petitioner / wife has preferred this revision petition.
3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the trial judge erroneously concluded that she is having sufficient source of income. She holds the post as Honorary Director in a private limited company, where her mother was employed and previously on 10th March she was employed in IT Company. Later she is also not occupying the post and she is dependant on her
mother and father along with the child. But the Court below failed to take note all the facts as well as the income of the respondent. The respondent is earning a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- per month, to that effect, the bank statement also been produced. The trial judge had erroneously dismissed the application. Hence, the revision petitioner / wife prays maintenance for her.
4. By way of reply the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the revision petitioner is having sufficient source of income, with the help of the same she purchased the property worth about Rs.2 Crores and she is also doing Salon / Spa. In view of the same, she is having sufficient income to maintain herself. Till date she is maintaining the regular amount coming to her account and as on date she is having sufficient source of income.
5. By way of reply the learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the apartment was purchased along with her mother, who is also employed in a private concern and also besides that her mother borrowed a loan from the bank and paying EMI amount around Rs.1,00,000/- every month. The property was purchased jointly and not in the individual name.
6. Considering both submissions, as on date the trial has begun in HMOP No.5432 of 2022 filed by the revision petitioner / wife seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and the evidence of the petitioner also been completed, now
the case is posted for the evidence of the respondent. Admittedly, as on date the child is aged about 7 years and studying I standard under the care and custody of the revision petitioner. But as per the new curriculum the school fees is Rs.1,60,000/- per year. To that effect, the fee receipt has also been produced. As on date there is no concrete proof that the wife is having considerable income. But the court below failed to give interim maintenance to the wife. Even as per the assets and liability statement submitted on the side of the respondent stating that the wife is having property and considerable income, without substantial proof to establish that she is having those properties in her name, the court below, erroneously dismissed her claim of interim maintenance, which order is liable to be set aside.
7. Therefore, the respondent is directed to pay another sum of Rs.30,000/- to his wife till disposal of the OP from the date of the application in IA No.3 of 2023 and also directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the child as educational expenses for the forthcoming Academic Year and he is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- each to the minor child and wife, totally, Rs.60,000/- from the date of the IA. No.3 of 2023 and arrears amount also to be paid within 12 weeks and as on date, the trial has commenced and both the parties are directed to cooperate for the trial. The amount to be paid to the account of the revision petitioner or before the trial court.
8. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The impugned order passed in IA No.3 of 2023 in OP No.5432 of 2022 dated 30.04.2024 on the file of the V Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai, is set aside. No costs.
21-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order MTL To
1. The V Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai.
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
MTL 21-04-2026