P.Senthilkumar vs M.Krishnaveni

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 25, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1755922

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1755922
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan
Decided On: Mar 25, 2025
Case Number: CRL RC/239/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

P.Senthilkumar

Respondent

M.Krishnaveni

Excerpt

.....the husband stating that the page no.1/4 petitioner is receiving salary of rs.60,000/-, whereas the family court failed to consider the same and ordered rs.25,000/- as maintenance, which warrants interference by this court.2. it is to be noted that the maintenance case is the summary procedureand only based on the relief and the income, the quantum of maintenance will be decided. there is no material to show that the respondent/wife is earning and is able to maintain herself with the minor child. in the absence of the same, and considering the occupation of the revision petitioner and also his income and further taking into account the price index being varying and rising day-by-day and the cost of living as on date, the family court granted rs.15,000/- as maintenance to the first respondent and rs.10,000/- to the second respondent- minor child.3. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the maintenance awarded by the family court is reasonable and not exorbitant and there is no perversity in the same. this court does not find any reason to interfere with theorder passed by the family court. accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.the miscellaneous petition is closed. cs page no.2/4 to1. the judge, family court, erode.2. the section officer, criminal section (records), high court, madras. page no.3/4 p.velmurugan, j cs page no.4/4

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 25.03.2025
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN and Crl.M.P.No.2140 of 2024 --- P.Senthilkumar, S/o Palanichamy .. Petitioner Vs.
1. M.Krishnaveni
2. Minor Deepshika, D/o P.Senthilkumar, Minor represented through first respondent, mother and natural guardian .. Respondents
Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397(1) read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. against the order dated 27.11.2023 passed in M.C.No.28 of 2017 on the file of the Family Court, Erode. For petitioner : Mr.C.Vakeeswaran For respondents : Mr.G.R.Hari

ORDER

Challenging the order passed by the Family Court, Erode in M.C.No.28 of 2017, the present revision petition is filed by the husband stating that the Page No.1/4 petitioner is receiving salary of Rs.60,000/-, whereas the Family Court failed to consider the same and ordered Rs.25,000/- as maintenance, which warrants interference by this Court.

2. It is to be noted that the maintenance case is the summary procedure

and only based on the relief and the income, the quantum of maintenance will be decided. There is no material to show that the respondent/wife is earning and is able to maintain herself with the minor child. In the absence of the same, and considering the occupation of the revision petitioner and also his income and further taking into account the price index being varying and rising day-by-day and the cost of living as on date, the Family Court granted Rs.15,000/- as maintenance to the first respondent and Rs.10,000/- to the second respondent- minor child.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the maintenance awarded by the Family Court is reasonable and not exorbitant and there is no perversity in the same. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the

order passed by the Family Court. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.

The miscellaneous petition is closed. cs Page No.2/4 To

1. The Judge, Family Court, Erode.

2. The Section Officer, Criminal Section (Records), High Court, Madras. Page No.3/4 P.VELMURUGAN, J cs Page No.4/4

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2025 Same Parties P.Senthilkumar vs M.Krishnaveni Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan