IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
D.Dwarakesh – Appellant
Versus
Manisha Dwarakesh – Respondent
CMP NO. 5949 OF 2026 | I.A No. 6 of 2025 in O.P No. 3371 of 2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges family court interim order. (Para 1) |
| 2. parties heard in court. (Para 2) |
| 3. mother complied; entitled to child visitation. (Para 3) |
| 4. petition dismissed; expedite trial. (Para 4) |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 26-03-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI AND CMP NO. 5949 OF 2026 D.Dwarakesh Petitioner(s)
Vs Manisha Dwarakesh Respondent(s)
PRAYER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, seeking to set aside the order and decreetal order passed in I.A No. 6 of 2025 in O.P No. 3371 of 2024 on the file of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.A. Saravanan For Respondent(s): Mrs. P. Srividhya
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking to set aside the order and decreetal order passed in I.A No. 6 of 2025 in O.P No. 3371 of 2024 on the file of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai.
2. Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Both parties appeared before this Court. On enquiry, it reveals that the respondent/mother of the child used to take the child from the home of the revision petitioner and she complied with the order as directed by the court and there is no violation on her part. Since, the respondent complied with the order without any deviation, the Civil Revision Petition as such is not acceptable one for the reasons that child is aged about 7 years. As a mother, the respondent is entitled to visit child. Therefore, the objection raised to that effect is not sustainable. Even the application filed by the petitioner by invoking Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC as such, is not acceptable one. Therefore, the reason assigned by the Trial Court requires no interference.
4. The Civil Revision Petition as such is not acceptable one for the reasons that child is aged about 7 years. As a mother, the respondent is entitled to visit child. Therefore, the objection raised to that effect is not sustainable. Accordingly this Revision Petition is dismissed. Further, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of the O.P within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order without making unnecessary adjournments. No costs.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.