Senthilmurugan, v. Alagumeenal,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR C.R.P(MD). No.337 of 2026 and C.M.P(MD) No.1534 of 2026 Senthilmurugan ... Petitioner Vs Alagumeenal ... Respondent PRAYER :-Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 05.11.2025 made in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in H.M.O.P.No.94 of 2024 on the file of the Sub Court, Keeranur, Pudukkottai District and allow this Civil Revision Petition.

For Petitioner : M/s.Prabha for Mr.D.Rameshkumar 1/5

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the fair and decreetal order dated 05.11.2025 made in I.A. No.1 of 2025 in H.M.O.P. No.94 of 2024 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Keeranur, Pudukkottai District.

2. The respondent/wife filed the above application seeking maintenance of Rs.50,000/- for herself and her children. The learned trial Judge, by the impugned order, dated 06.01.2025, directed the petitioner/husband to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month towards alimony for the wife and the female child. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner/husband contended that the petitioner is working as a daily wager in a tea shop and is not in a position to comply with the order directing payment of Rs.10,000/- per month towards maintenance.

2/5

4. The trial Court, while rejecting the said contention, took note of the conduct of the petitioner and recorded a finding that he is leading a vagabond life, spending his income on other means and neglecting to maintain his wife and child.

5. When a query was put to the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the children born out of the wedlock, it was fairly admitted that there are two children, of whom the male child is residing with the petitioner/husband and the female child is residing with the respondent/wife.

6. It is seen that the petitioner is maintaining the male child, while the respondent/wife is maintaining the female child. The quantum of maintenance fixed by the trial Court for the wife and the female child cannot be said to be excessive or unreasonable. 3/5

7. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the well considered order passed by the trial Court. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

Speaking : Yes / No 10.02.2026 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Indu 4/5

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

Indu 10.02.2026 5/5