IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR and C.M.P.No.2373 of 2024 G.Sasi Rekha ... Petitioner vs.

N.Purushothaman ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal orders passed in I.A.No.54 of 2023 in H.M.O.P.No.9 of 2022 dated 11.09.2023, on the file of the Court of Sub-ordinate Judge, Chidambaram and dismiss the said I.A. by allowing this C.R.P.

For Petitioner : M/s.Manne Ramya for M/s.B.Pachaiyappan For Respondent : Mr.S.Suresh

O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Chidambaram in I.A.No.54 of 2023 in H.M.O.P.No.9 of 2022 dated 11.09.2023 allowing the application filed by respondent by granting visitation rights to the respondent/husband during first working day of a month that too in the Court premises.

2. The petitioner herein field original petition in H.M.O.P.No.9 of

2022 seeking divorce against the respondent/husband on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. Pending main original petition, the respondent filed an application under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking visitation right. The Trial Court, by impugned order granted visitation rights to the respondent by permitting him to have interaction with the child during first working day of a month in the Court premises. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner/wife has come before this Court.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent has not taken any care about the child for all these years and suddenly filed an application seeking visitation rights and therefore, the same is not maintainable.

4. A perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the petitioner in the petition filed by the respondent seeking visitation rights would indicate that the petitioner has not made out any serious allegations against the respondent. The averments made by the petitioner in the counter affidavit are all general in nature, as if the respondent is not inclined to take care of the child. The Trial Court observed that the conflict between the petitioner and respondent should not come in the way of welfare of the child and respondent as a father, is entitled to have visitation rights. Infact, the Trial Court permitted the respondent to have interaction with the child only one day that too in the Court premises. In such circumstances, I do not find any serious error in the impugned order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Chidambaram in I.A.No.54 of 2023 in H.M.O.P.No.9 of 2022 dated

11.09.2023.

5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.

10.02.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No dm To The Sub-ordinate Judge, Chidambaram.

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

dm

10.02.2026