P.Jagadesh Kumar vs J.Yuvarani

Court
Madras High Court

CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED
CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
and
CRL MP No.6191 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA010733632026}
P.Jagadesh Kumar
S/o. K.M.Padmanabhan,
New No.12, Old No.93,
VIII Main Road,
Thiruvalluvar Nagar,
Erukkanchery,
Chennai - 600 118.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. J.Yuvarani
W/o. P.Jagadesh Kumar,
Residing at No.19/43,
Krishnamurthy Salai,
Erukkanchery,
Chennai - 600 118.
2. J.Deepshika
D/o. P.Jagadesh Kumar,
Rep.by its Natural Guardian
Mother J.Yuvarani,
Both of them
Residing at No.19/43,
Krishnamurthy Salai,
Erukkanchery,
Chennai - 600 118.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: To set aside the order dated 23.02.2026 passed in the M.P.No.1686 of
2025 in M.C.No.228 of 2022 before the V Additional Principal Family Court,
Chennai.
__________
Page1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 06:23:07 pm )

CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
For Petitioner(s): Ms. V.M.Poojalashmi
For Respondent(s): Mr. R.Rajesh Kumar
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the Revision Petitioner,
challenging the order dated 23.02.2026 passed in M.P.No.1686 of 2025 in
M.C.No.228 of 2022 by the learned V Additional Principal Family Court,
Chennai, dismissing the application filed by him seeking to set aside the ex
parte order passed against him in the maintenance proceedings.
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present Revision are that the
first Respondent is the wife of the Revision Petitioner and the second
Respondent is their minor daughter. The Respondents have instituted
M.C.No.228 of 2022 seeking maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. During
the pendency of the said proceedings, the Revision Petitioner was set ex parte
on 11.03.2024. Thereafter, he filed M.P.No.1686 of 2025 seeking to set aside
the ex parte order. The learned Family Court, by order dated 23.02.2026,
dismissed the said application, aggrieved by which the present Revision has
been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner submitted
that the Revision Petitioner was actively contesting the connected proceedings
__________
Page2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 06:23:07 pm )

CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
and had also challenged the interim maintenance order before this Court in
Crl.R.C.No.172 of 2024. It is further submitted that the Revision Petitioner was
under the bona fide impression that the proceedings initiated earlier for setting
aside the ex parte order were pending and that he had no intention to remain
absent or avoid the maintenance proceedings.
4. The learned counsel further submitted that the Revision Petitioner has
subsequently paid a sum of Rs.6,52,892/- towards interim maintenance between
05.12.2024 and 26.12.2025. It is therefore contended that the learned Family
Court ought to have adopted a liberal approach and provided an opportunity to
the Revision Petitioner to contest the main maintenance proceedings on merits.
5. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the
materials available on record.
6. At the outset, it is to be observed that maintenance proceedings are
intended to provide immediate financial assistance to a wife and minor children
who are unable to maintain themselves. Such proceedings should not be
unnecessarily prolonged, particularly when the claim concerns the basic
necessities and welfare of a minor child.
__________
Page3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 06:23:07 pm )

CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
7. In the present case, the Revision Petitioner admittedly had knowledge
of the maintenance proceedings, as is evident from the earlier proceedings
initiated by him challenging the interim maintenance order in M.P.No.81 of
2023 and the subsequent filing of Crl.R.C.No.172 of 2024 before this Court.
Therefore, the contention that he was unaware of the main maintenance
proceedings cannot be accepted.
8. The Revision Petitioner has also contended that he was pursuing
M.P.No.1079 of 2024 and was under the impression that the said application
was pending. However, the pendency of other proceedings cannot, by itself,
absolve a litigant of his responsibility to diligently pursue the main maintenance
proceedings. The Revision Petitioner ought to have taken appropriate steps
within the prescribed period to seek setting aside of the ex parte order.
9. This Court also takes note of the fact that the Revision Petitioner
claims to have paid a sum of Rs.6,52,892/- towards interim maintenance. While
such payments are relevant and shall be given due credit, payment of interim
maintenance alone cannot automatically confer a right to have the ex parte order
set aside, particularly when the application has been filed after considerable
delay and the explanation offered has not been found satisfactory by the learned
Family Court.
__________
Page4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 06:23:07 pm )

CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
10. The object of maintenance proceedings cannot be defeated by
repeated applications and procedural delays. The first Respondent and the minor
daughter are entitled to have their claim for maintenance adjudicated without
further delay. At the same time, the Revision Petitioner cannot be permitted to
take advantage of his own failure to diligently prosecute the proceedings.
11. This Court finds that the learned Family Court has considered the
circumstances and the explanation offered by the Revision Petitioner and has
rightly dismissed the application. No perversity, illegality or material
irregularity is made out warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its
revisional jurisdiction.
12. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case stands dismissed .
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition, if any, is closed. No costs.
13. The learned V Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai, is directed
to proceed with the main maintenance proceedings in M.C.No.228 of 2022 and
dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, without granting unnecessary
adjournments. The learned Family Court is further directed to release the entire
amount deposited by the Revision Petitioner towards arrears of maintenance in
favour of the first Respondent, in accordance with law.
__________
Page5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 06:23:07 pm )

CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
14. It is made clear that the amounts already paid by the Revision
Petitioner towards interim maintenance shall be duly given credit while
calculating the outstanding maintenance arrears and while passing final orders
in the main maintenance proceedings. The rights and contentions of both parties
regarding the quantum of maintenance are left open to be decided by the learned
Family Court on merits.
02-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
SHA
__________
Page6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 06:23:07 pm )

CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
To
The V Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai.
__________
Page7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 06:23:07 pm )

CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
SHAMIM AHMED, J.
SHA
CRL RC No. 792 of 2026
02-11-2026
__________
Page8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 06:23:07 pm )