SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Magitha vs R.Mohan on 18 December, 2019

Crl.O.P.No.20505 of 2011


DATED : 18.12.2019



Crl.O.P.No.20505 of 2011

Magitha … Petitioner


R.Mohan … Respondent

Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to direct the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Udagamandalam the Nilgiris to set aside
the dismissal order in CMP No.509/2010 dated 06.05.2010 and
consequently restore the CMP No.509/2010 in MC No.1/2006 on its file
and direct the respondent herein to pay the balance maintenance
amount as well as the future maintenance amount immediately to the
petitioner herein as per the orders passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Udagamandalam, The Nilgiris in M.C No.1/2006 dated
01.11.2007 by the order or orders or direction whichever this Court
thinks deem fit in the interest of justice.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Damodharan

Crl.O.P.No.20505 of 2011


This Criminal Original Petition has been filed challenging the

order of dismissal in CMP No.509 of 2010 dated 06.05.2010 passed by

the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udagamandalam, The Nilgiris District.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the wife and

the respondent is the husband and their marriage was performed on

22.05.2002 at Kinnakorai Village, Nilgiris as per the customs of

Badugar Community and lived together till 28.09.2005. At the time of

marriage, 30 sovereigns of gold ornaments, house hold articles and

cash of Rs.1,50,000/- were given to the petitioner. Thereafter, there

was a matrimonial dispute in the matrimonial house and therefore, the

petitioner was forced to lodge a criminal case and the same was

registered in Crime No.124 of 2005 by the All Women Police Station

(Central Wing), Coimbatore for the offences punishable under Sections

498A and Section385 of IPC. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a maintenance

petition in M.C No.1 of 2006 before the learned Judicial Magistrate,

Udagamandalam and the same was allowed directing the respondent

to pay Rs.1,500/- per month as monthly maintenance amount from

the date of petition and also directed to pay the future maintenance on

Crl.O.P.No.20505 of 2011

or before 5th of every English calendar month. Aggrieved by the said

order, the respondent filed a criminal revision petition in Crl.R.C No.12

of 2007 and the learned Sessions Judge, Nilgiris dismissed the said

criminal revision petition on 28.02.2008, since the respondent did not

pay the maintenance amount as directed by the learned Judicial

Magistrate, Udagamandalam and confirmed the order of the Judicial

Magistrate, Udagamandalam. Hence, the petitioner was forced to file

a petition by invoking Section 128 of Cr.P.C and pleaded the trial Court

to direct the respondent to pay the entire arrears of monthly

maintenance amount from 01.11.2008 to 31.10.2009 and future

monthly maintenance amount as per its order dated 01.11.2007 and

the same was numbered as CMP No.509 of 2010 in M.C No.1 of 2006.

Similarly, the petitioner has also filed a petition in CMP No.9698 of

2008 seeking for monthly maintenance amount and future

maintenance amount. Due to the non-appearance of the petitioner

and the counsel, the said petition was dismissed for non-prosecution

on 06.05.2010. Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, the petitioner

filed a Criminal Revision petition Nos.4 and 5 of 2010 and the said

petitions were also dismissed on 29.03.2011. Challenging the aforesaid

order, the present Criminal Original Petition is filed.

Crl.O.P.No.20505 of 2011

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit

that without giving opportunity, the petition was dismissed and no

application was filed under Section 126(2) of Cr.P.C.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and that

the petitioner filed a petition seeking for maintenance amount and the

said petition was dismissed on the ground of non-appearance of the

petitioner and without giving opportunity, the aforesaid dismissal order

has been passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udagamandalam is

unreasonable and hence, for giving one more opportunity, this Court is

inclined to restore the Crl.M.P No.509 of 2010 for effective

adjudication and the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udagamandalam is

directed to pass appropriate orders after hearing the parties.

5. In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed.


Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order
Index: Yes/ No
Internet: Yes/ No
The Judicial Magistrate, Udagamandalam,The Nilgiris

Crl.O.P.No.20505 of 2011



Crl.O.P.No.20505 of 2011



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation