← Library
Madras High CourtCRP(MD)/3037/2024dismissed

Dhaneswaran v. M. Keerthanadevi

2025-07-17Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.3037 of 2024 and C.M.P.(MD) No.17291 of 2024 Dhaneswaran ... Revision Petitioner/ 1st Appellant/1st Respondent Vs.

1. M.Keerthanadevi ... 1st Respondent/Respondent / Complainant

2. Thangavel ... 2nd Respondent/ 2nd Appellant/ 2nd Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 02.08.2024 passed in Crl.Appeal No.79 of 2022 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Karur in confirming the order dated 27.12.2021 passed in D.V.C.No.3 of 2020 on the file of Additional Mahila Judge, Karur.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Suresh For R1 : Mr.K.R.Laxman For R2 : No appearance

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging order dated 02.08.2024 passed in Crl.Appeal No.79 of 2022 on the file of the Additional Sessions 1/5

Court, Karur confirming the order dated 27.12.2021 passed in D.V.C.No.3 of 2020 on the file of Additional Mahila Judge, Karur. 2.The marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent was solemnized on 22.05.2005 and they were blessed with two children. Subsequently, there was a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the first respondent. Thereby, as against the petitioner and other family members, the first respondent registered a domestic violence case on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Karur. After adjudication, the trial Court granted protection and residential order and also directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as monthly maintenance and awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the first respondent and her children. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.

79 of 2022 before the Additional Sessions Court, Karur. The said appeal was dismissed. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court and the Lower Appellate Court had arrived at a conclusion that there is no domestic violence as against the first respondent either by the petitioner as well as his family members.

compensation and the said order is not sustainable. He further submits that the petitioner has already deposited the compensation amount as awarded by the trial Court before the trial Court. Hence, he prayed for appropriate orders. 4.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submits that the first respondent and her children are residing in Coimbatore. Coimbatore is a metropolitan city. The trial Court has awarded only a meagre sum of Rs.10,000/- as maintenance to the first respondent and her two children. Thereby, the order of the trial Court was confirmed by the Lower Appellate Court and the same does not warrant any interference. 5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the first respondent and perused the materials placed on record. 6.The facts in the present case are not in dispute.

Admittedly, there was a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the first respondent, thereby the first respondent filed a domestic violence case as against the petitioner and his family members. In that proceedings, the first respondent was awarded with a sum of Rs.10,000/- as monthly maintenance both by the trial Court as well as by the Lower Appellate Court. It is also equally undisputed that the first respondent is residing in Coimbatore along with her two children.

sum of Rs.10,000/- per month will not in any way be sufficient for maintaining two minor children. The trial Court as well as the Lower Appellate Court has rightly appreciated all these facts and granted the maintenance and compensation award in favour of the first respondent. 7.For the above reasons, this Court is of the view that the order of the trial Court as well as the Lower Appellate Court need not be interfered. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. The trial Court is directed to disburse the amount already deposited by the petitioner to the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

17.07.2025 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes / No ta To 1.The Additional Sessions Judge, Karur.

2.The Additional Mahila Judge, Karur.

3. The Section Officer, Vernacular Records, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

ta C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.3037 of 2024 17.07.2025 5/5