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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 98666

MADRAS HIGH COURT
2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03.02.2022 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN CRP(NPD)Nos.205 & 206
D)Nos.205 & 206



CRP(NPD)Nos.205 & 206 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.02.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

CRP(NPD)Nos.205 & 206 of 2022 and

CMP.No.1048 of 2022

Chandra

... Petitioner in both CRPs

Vs

Anbukkarasan

... Respondent in both CRPs

Common Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India, against the order dated 04.12.2021 in I.A.Nos.127 and

128 of 2021 in HMOP.No.16 of 2002 on the file of Subordinate Judge,

Attur.

(In both CRPs)

For Petitioner

: Mr.R.Mubarak Basha

COMMON ORDER

The challenge in these revisions is to the order of the trial Court

dismissing applications in I.A.Nos.127 and 128 of 2021 filed by the

1/4

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

CRP(NPD)Nos.205 & 206 of 2022

petitioner seeking to reopen the case and to enable cross examination of the

respondent. The proceedings are under the Hindu Marriage Act. The

husband had sought for divorce on the ground for cruelty and desertion. The

original proceeding was instituted in the year 2002 is almost 20 years now.

The wife had filed the applications seeking to reopen and for permission to

cross examine the husband, who was examined as PW1 on the ground that

while cross examining the husband, certain questions based on the

pleadings in the reply statement have not been asked.

2.The learned trial Judge on an assessment of the evidence which

is already on record had concluded that several questions have been put

based on the averments in the reply statement and therefore, these petitions

have been filed only to drag on the proceedings. The learned trial Court has

also taken note of the fact that this Court had directed the trial Court to

dispose of the O.P. within a period of three months from 05.03.2021.

3.In view of the said categorically finding of the trial Court the

cross examination is complete. I do not think I should interfere with the

2/4

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

CRP(NPD)Nos.205 & 206 of 2022

order of the trial Court, both the revisions are therefore dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

03.02.2022

vs

Index: No

Speaking order

To:

1.The Subordinate Judge, Attur.

2.The Section Officer,

VR Section,

Madras High Court, Chennai.

3/4

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

CRP(NPD)Nos.205 & 206 of 2022

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

vs

CRP(NPD)Nos.205 & 206 of 2022 and

CMP.No.1048 of 2022

03.02.2022

4/4

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

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 Back to top