← Library
Madras High CourtCONT P(MD)/3463/2025closed

Narmatha v. S.Magudapathi Raja

2026-06-11Honourable Mr Justice V. Lakshminarayanan6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN in CRP.(MD)No.1651 of 2024 Narmatha ... Petitioner vs.

S.Magudapathi Raja ... Respondent PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the contemnor/petitioner for the willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court CRP.(MD)No.1651 of 2024 dated 09.07.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Ramanathan For Respondent : Mr.R.Udhayakumar

O R D E R

This contempt is initiated by the wife against her husband alleging non compliance with the undertaking given in CRP(MD) No. 1651 of 2024, dated 09.07.2025.

1/6

2.CRP(MD) No.1651 of 2024 was initiated by the husband and four others, challenging the initiation of proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in DVC.No.1 of 2024 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate at Thiruppuvanam, Sivagangai District. 3.In the revision, after issuance of notice, this Court, by an order dated 09.07.2025, quashed the DVC.No.1 of 2024 on the undertaking given by the contemnor, Mr.S.Magudapathi Raja, that he will pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month to the two children born to him and Ms.Narmatha. Since an undertaking had been given to pay the amount and as the same had been violated, the present contempt came forth before this Court.

4.Noticing that the undertaking had been violated, this Court issued a statutory notice to Mr.S.Magudapathi Raja on 30.03.2026. In compliance with the statutory notice, Mr.S.Magudapathi Raja was present before this Court on 27.04.2026. On that day, Mr.S.Magudapathi Raja represented that he has no funds to pay the amount and sought the contempt to be dismissed. The request of Mr.S.Magudapathi Raja was rejected. In compliance with the 2/6

principles of natural justice and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, he was given an opportunity to explain his conduct. To hear him on that aspect, the matter was adjourned to 03.06.2026. 5.On 04.06.2026, Mr.Magudapathi Raja represented that he is unemployed and has no means to pay. In lieu of monthly maintenance till the children reach the age of 18, he agreed that he will settle two properties situated in S.Nos.20/2 and 20/5A of Keeladi Village, Thirupuvanam Taluk, Sivagangai District. Mr.S.Magudapathy Raja states that this property came to him by way of a partition, which had been entered into between his sibling and his father in Doc.No.460 of 2020, dated 07.02.2020. He also made a request that he wants the property to go to his children and that post the settlement, Ms.Narmatha should not alienate the property to anyone.

Both sides agreed that the property is worth about Rs.40,00,000/-. 6.Calculating the liability of the contemnor at Rs.20,000/- per month, which converts to about 2.4 lakhs a year, the property, which is being offered in lieu of the undertaking, would cover the amount of liability that Mr.Magudapathy Raja had undertaken to discharge.

sons with the mother as the natural guardian to receive the gift deed. Mr.S.Magudapathi Raja sought for a week's time to do the needful. Hence, I adjourned the matter to today.

7.When I took up the matter for hearing, Mr.Udayakumar appearing for the contemnor, produced the original and photostat copies of the settlement deed in Doc.No.3357 of 2026, dated 10.06.2026.

8.The original of the settlement deed has been handed over by Mr.S.Magudapathy Raja to Ms.Narmatha. The same is recorded. 9.As the contemnor has executed the document which covers not only the amount that he is liable to pay, but also his future liability of the order dated 09.07.2025 in CRP(MD) No.1651 of 2024, stands satisfied. No further contempt can be initiated by Ms.Narmatha alleging violation of the undertaking given in the aforesaid order. Since the properties have been settled in favour of the minors, without permission of the Court, the properties will not be alienated by the natural guardian. Mr.S.Magudapathy Raja states that the original of the partition deed is available with his brother. He shall 4/6

ensure that a certified copy of the partition deed is obtained and the copy thereof is given to Ms.Narmatha or her counsel within a period of one week from today.

10.The Contempt Petition stands closed.

Index :Yes / No 11.06.2026 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No mm 5/6

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

mm Order made in 11.06.2026 6/6