SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Mad) 537

RAJU
S. M. Syed Amina Beevi – Appellant
Versus
Thaika Sahib Alim – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:K. Yamunan, Advocate.
For the Respondents: None.

Judgment :-

1. The petitioner in the above revision filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, which is yet to be numbered but had to be posted for orders regarding the maintainability, challenges the return of the papers said to have been made by an endorsement of the Sherishtadar of Family Court, Madras dt. 15.6.1993. The Registry of this Court has entertained a doubt regarding the maintainability of this revision and hence this revision was directed by me to be posted for orders.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner initially contended that the second respondent in the above revision, viz., the Sherishtadar of Family Court, Madras is not the competent authority to pass orders even for returning the papers and that if at all it is for the presiding officer of the Family Court to pass such orders in this regard. At this stage, this Court pointed out to the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the objection is only that the Sheristadar has passed the orders, the papers filed into this Court can be taken back and re-presented before the Family Court, so that a direction can be issued to the presiding officer himself to deal with the matter and pass appropriate orders.













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top