Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
G.Kothandaraman – Appellant
Versus
Latha – Respondent
ORDER :
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
This civil revision petition challenges the order passed by the learned IV Additional Principal Family Court at Chennai in I.A.No.3 of 2022 in O.P.No.5091 of 2021 dated 12.01.2024.
2. For the sake of the convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their ranks in the Original Petition.
3. O.P.No.5091 of 2021 is a petition filed under Section 9 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT . In the said proceedings, the respondent filed an application seeking for rejection of Original Petition. This petition was numbered as I.A.No.3 of 2022. After receipt of a counter, the learned Trial Judge by order dated 12.01.2024 dismissed the application. Hence, this revision.
4. OP.No.5091 of 2021 pleads that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 15.08.1999. It was in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. It is alleged that the marriage took place at Sri Angala Parameswari Temple at Vadapalani in Chennai. The petitioner pleaded that the marriage took place in the presence of friends, viz., Thilagar, Bharani and few others. The petitioner further pleaded that the parties set up their matrimonial home at No.40/A, Vasantha Nagar, Thiruvottri
The court affirmed that a rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 requires accepting the averments in the petition as true, deferring substantive marital status determinations to main proceedings....
The Family Court must only consider the averments in the plaint for rejection and cannot look into additional evidence at this stage.
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 does not apply to Scheduled Tribes absent a Central Government notification, rendering any solemnization under the Act void.
(1) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, does not apply to Scheduled Tribes.(2) Scheme of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is confined to marriages between two Hindus – Statutory conditions cannot be diluted by form o....
Restitution of conjugal rights – Where marriage itself is not proved, decree for restitution of conjugal rights cannot be sustained.
A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 if it fails to disclose a cause of action, and the burden lies on the plaintiff to provide necessary documentation to substantiate claims, especially ....
The rejection of plaint is valid under mandatory provisions when the plaintiff fails to provide necessary documentation to support their claim for partition.
The judgment establishes the principle that the scope of revisional powers of the High Court under Section 115 of the CPC is limited to the irregular exercise or non-exercise of jurisdiction, and doe....
(1) No application for amendment shall be allowed after trial has commenced unless court comes to conclusion that in spite of due diligence party could not have raised matter before commencement of t....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
