Daily Archives: October 9, 2007

Ramakrishna v. Priya Ganesan – Custody of Minor child

“ 23. ……We feel interest of justice would be served by directing that the mother shall permit the child to be with the father between 10.30 AM and 4.00 PM twice a week during working days, preferably on Monday and Thursday. For the aforesaid purpose, the child can be brought to the office of the concerned Advocate.

24. If the father of the child finds it difficult to stay on for finalisation of the proceedings, it would be obviously open for him to authorise his father, who has filed the present Habeas Corpus Petition, on his behalf to prosecute such proceedings before the concerned Family Court and it is expected that no unnecessary technical plea should be permitted to be raised on such aspect.

25. Keeping in view the urgency of the matter, we further direct the I Addl. Judge, Family Court, Madras to dispose of the matter by the end of June, 2007. Keeping in view the complexity of the matter, we further direct that both the parties shall be permitted to appear through their Advocates, if they so desire. …..”


J.Balasubramaniam v. S.Pitchammal – Irretrievable break down of marriage

Irretrievable break down of marriage.


Trouble started when Wife wanted to stay away from Husband’s parents. When Husband did NOT accept, wife cast aspersions on husband. Ever since trouble escalated and they have been staying away for 10 years. Marriage not consummated. Wife filed complaint against husband at police station. Husband made rival claims. Husband is aged 50 and wife aged 40.


The Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court, decrees divorce on grounds of Irretrievable break down of marriage.



S.Amutha v. C.Manivanna Bhupathy – Child’s testimony.doc


Husband and wife had a matrimonial dispute. Wife left husband. Two children aged 11 and 8 born of the wedlock lived with the Husband. Husband filed a divorce petition on grounds of desertion. During the proceedings the Husband placed his son as a credible witness. The Son who was 11 years old narrated how his mother was quarrelsome and left them and went to her parent’s house often and how they stayed with the father willingly !!

Now the Honbl’e High court of Chennai says this child witness is NOT competent / credible !!!

This judgment becomes relevant and important as many women these days have PHYSICAL CUSTODY of children after a 498a and tutor the kid(s) to speak against the dad !! aren’t these testimonies of the kids to be disallowed as well ??