C.R.P.No.1218 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.06.2023

CORAM:

The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

C.R.P.No.1218 of 2021

and C.M.P.No.9400 of 2021

S.Uthra

...Revision Petitioner/Respondent/

Respondent

-Vs-

R.Sathish

...Respondent/Petitioner/

Petitioner

Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution

of India, to set aside the order of the learned II Additional Family Court

Judge, Chennai, dated 12.03.2021 in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in H.M.O.P.No.973

of 2018.

For Petitioner

: Mr.N.Ganesh

For Respondent

: M/s.H.Adaikala Arockiaraj

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the order of the

learned II Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai, dated 12.03.2021 in

I.A.No.1 of 2019 in H.M.O.P.No.973 of 2018.

1/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.No.1218 of 2021

2.Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner submitted that the

Revision Petitioner is the wife, the Respondent is the husband had filed

H.M.O.P.No.973 of 2018, seeking dissolution of marriage. The learned II

Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Chennai, had granted a decree of

dissolution of marriage as per order dated 14.03.2019. It was an ex parte

decree. The Revision Petitioner herein, who was the Respondent in

H.M.O.P.No.973 of 2018, did not file any Petition to set aside the ex parte

decree. While so, in the month of October after six months, after disposal

of H.M.O.P.No.973 of 2018, the Respondent herein had issued an advocate

notice to the wife seeking return of gold jewels and spending nearly Rs.8

lakhs for the marriage by notice dated 03.09.2019, which was replied by

the Revision Petitioner wife by advocate notice dated 06.09.2019. After

receipt of the reply notice by the wife, the husband had issued rejoinder

notice dated 30.09.2019. After exchange of notice, the husband had filed

Petition in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in H.M.O.P.No.973 of 2018 under Section 27

of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking return of gold jewels. After

receipt of notice from the Family Court the wife as Respondent in I.A.No.1

of 2019 in H.M.O.P.No.973 of 2018 had filed counter resisting the same.

After due enquiry, the learned II Additional Principal Judge Family Court,

Chennai, had passed an order directing the Respondent (wife) to return the

2/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.No.1218 of 2021

gold jewels, which is extracted hereunder:

“3.Per contra, the Respondent would submit that

the Petitioner has not given any jewels or any articles to

her at the time of marriage. The contention of the

Petitioner is that his parents gave the articles mentioned

in the Petition to his wife. It is not specifically denied by

the Respondent in her counter. Further, the Respondent

would aver that her articles are in the custody of her

husband and that he has no interest in claiming the

articles. But she has not submitted the details of what all

the articles of her are in the custody of the Petitioner.

From this, it is clear that the Petitioner is in custody of

the golden articles mentioned in the Petition which were

given to her by the parents of the Petitioner at the time of

marriage. Therefore, the Petitioner is entitled for the

relief as prayed for”.

3.Aggrieved by the same, the Revision Petitioner (wife) against

whom the decree of dissolution of marriage was granted by the Family

Court, Chennai, had filed this Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of

the Constitution of India, stating that the learned II Additional Principal

Judge Family Court, Chennai, had passed an order in a Petition which is

maintainable only when the main H.M.O.P.No.973 of 2018 is pending.

After disposal of the case, the Family Court has no jurisdiction to entertain

Petition under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. While so, the

Petition in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in H.M.O.P.No.973 of 2018 was taken up for

enquiry and the order p