Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 18846
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V. Karthikeyan, K.Rajasekar, JJ
Parameswari – Appellant
Versus
Subramanian – Respondent
CMA No. 2685 of 2017 | Criminal Revision No.553 of 2018
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.C.Deivasigamani
For the Respondents: Mr.V.Vijayakumar
Decree of dissolution of marriage renders prior maintenance and restitution proceedings infructuous, allowing appellant to seek remedies based on new developments.
Headnote:This case pertains to maintenance and restitution of conjugal rights under the Family Court Act. The appellant sought maintenance while the respondent sought restitution. A common order granted restitution and denied maintenance. Post the ruling, a decree of dissolution was issued under the Hindu Marriage Act. The current cases are rendered infructuous due to the decree, allowing the appellant to reopen upon further appeal. No costs.
| 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 valid decree dissolving the marriage, the appellant herein will have to necessarily workout her remedy over that particular decree. We would close the appeal and the criminal revision case, as of now they have become infructuous, with liberty to the appellant to reopen them depending on the nature of order passed, if any appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 08.09.2025 in HMOP No.1995 of 2024. As on today, we are informed that no appeal had been preferred against the order in HMOP No.1995 of 2024 dated 08.09.2025. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
