Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V. Karthikeyan, K.Rajasekar, JJ
Parameswari – Appellant
Versus
Subramanian – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initial case for maintenance filed. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. decree of dissolution affects prior orders. (Para 3) |
| 3. cases closed due to dissolution decree. (Para 4) |
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.V.Karthikeyan J.)
The appellant had filed M.C No.139 of 2011 before the Family Court, Coimbatore seeking maintenance from the respondent. The respondent had filed HMOP No.929 of 2011 again before the Family Court, Coimbatore seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Both the matters were heard together and by common order dated 24.01.2017, the petition seeking maintenance was dismissed and the petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights was allowed. Challenging the common order, the above appeal and criminal revision case have been filed and have been pending from the year 2017.
2.Heard both sides.
3.Since the appellant did not join with the respondent, the respondent subsequently filed HMOP No.1995 of 2024 under Section 13(1)(ia) & 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking dissolution of marriage which took place on 06.06.1985. An exparte decree had been passed by the Principal Family Court, Coimbatore on 08.09.2025.
4.In view of that subsequent event, since there is a
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
