BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 18.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR and CMP(MD).No.18387 of 2025 M.Malini ... Petitioner Vs.

Karthik Dharmaraj Pathinettam Padiyan represented by his Power Agent A.Vatsala ... Respondent PRAYER :-Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constituion of India, to quash the impugned order dated 20.09.2025 of the Learned Family Judge in HMOP No. 889 of 2021 and consequently to direct the Respondent/ Petitioner to appear in person for cross examination in the joint trial in HMOP No. 889 of 2021 and MC No. 175 of 2021 pending on the file of the Learned Family Judge, Madurai.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Rooban For Respondents : Mr.J.Alaguram Jothi

ORDER

This civil revision petition has been filed to set aside the impugned order dated 20.09.2025 of the Learned Family Judge in HMOP No. 889 of 2021 and consequently to direct the Respondent/ Petitioner to appear in person for cross examination in the joint trial in HMOP No. 889 of 2021 and MC No. 175 of

2021 pending on the file of the Learned Family Judge, Madurai.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records.

3.The present application has been filed challenging the order passed by the trial Court permitting the revision petitioner to appear through Video Conferencing (VC).

4.The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the procedure contemplated under the Madras High Court Video Conferencing Rules in Courts, 2020, has not been properly followed. He referred to Rule 4, sub-clauses (1), (2), (3), (4), and Rule 7, which are extracted herein.

4. Application for conduct of Court proceedings through Video Conferencing:

(1) The Court may, Suo Moto, or on the application of a party or witness decide to conduct the Judicial Proceeding by Video-conference.

(2) An application for Video-conferencing shall be supported by an affidavit evidencing the Justifiable Circumstances, and all relevant particulars of the proposed Remote Site.

(3) Except in case of urgent applications for ex parte ad interim orders, the Court shall decide such application after serving notice to and hearing all parties concerned in accordance with these Rules.

(4) An order permitting the conduct of Judicial Proceedings through Video-Conferencing may:

(a) fix the date, time and schedule of the Video-

Conference;

(b) appoint a co-ordinator at the Court Site and, where appropriate, at the Remote Site;

(c) enable public participation, through media representation or otherwise, at such hearings;

(d) provide for in-camera hearing at the Court and Remote Site;

(e) direct the payment of costs of Video-Conferencing and fi x the time for payment thereof;

(f) where the hearing is for purposes of examining a witness or accused, specify the manner of transmission and authentication of the deposition and documents to and from the Court Site and Remote Site and for the exhibition thereof;

(g) issue further directions as may be considered necessary, incidental or ancillary to the conduct of hearings by Video-Conference.

7. Examination of Witnesses/Persons (1) Any person being examined, including a witness, shall, before being examined from a Remote Site through Video-Conferencing, produce and file a proof of identity by submitting an identity document issued or duly recognized by the Government of India, State Government, Union Territory, or in the absence of such a document, an affidavit attested by any of the authorities referred to in Section 139 of the Code of Civil Procedure or Section 297 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , as the case may be. The affidavit must Inter Alia state that the person, who is shown to be the person to be examined as a witness, is the same person who is to depose at the virtual hearing. A copy of the proof of identity or affidavit, as the case may be, will be made available to the opposite party.

(2) The person being examined will ordinarily be examine