S.Suhasini v. V.R. Vinod Kumar Sah

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 22.07.2025 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI and CMP.Nos.17423 & 17424 of 2025 S.Suhasini ...Petitioner in both CRP's. Vs. V.R.Vinod Kumar Shah ...Respondent in both CRP's. Prayer in CRP.No.3117 of 2025: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the common order passed in I.A.No.4 of 2025 in HMOP.No.206 of 2020 dated 03.07.2025 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District and allow this Revision. Prayer in CRP.No.3118 of 2025: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the common order passed in I.A.No.3 of 2025 in HMOP.No.206 of 2020 dated 03.07.2025 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District and allow this Revision. Page No.1 of 5 In both CRP's.: For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar For Respondent : Mr.J.Joseph Sundar, for Caveator COMMON ORDER I have heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶2The revision petitioner/wife who is the respondent in HMOP.No.206 of 2020 pending on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Kanchipuram, challenges the common order dated 03.07.2025 passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Kanchipuram, dismissing the applications filed seeking to recall and reopen P.W.1 for further cross examination.

¶3After being examined as R.W.1, the revision petitioner/wife has taken out the said applications stating that she has come to know that the respondent/husband has misrepresented and misled facts before the trial court and therefore, the petitioner/wife wanted to further cross examine P.W.1.

¶4The applications were seriously opposed by the respondent/ Page No.2 of 5 husband. In and by a common order dated 03.07.2025, the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Kanchipuram, finding that the P.W.1 has been elaborately cross examined on several occasions and his examination was concluded way back on 16.11.2024 and also clearly finding that the facts which are now sought to be put to P.W.1 to expose the alleged misrepresentation and also the factum of misleading the Court, have already been put to P.W.1 in cross examination and that no substantial or justifiable grounds have been made out to entertain the applications, had dismissed the said applications, vide impugned common order.

¶5I do not find any infirmity or perversity in the findings of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Kanchipuram. In fact, on a perusal of the affidavits filed in support of the said applications, the reasons stated by the petitioner/wife are also very vague and certainly not convincing and therefore, there is no error in the order passed by the trial court, rejecting the request of the revision petitioner to recall and reopen P.W.1 for further cross examination. Page No.3 of 5

¶6For the reasons aforesaid, these Civil Revision Petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

22.07.2025 skt Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No To The Principal Sub Court, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District. Page No.4 of 5 CRP.Nos.3117o&o3118oofo2025 Poo.B.oBALAJI,ooJ. skt CRP.Nos.3117o&o3118oofo2025 and CMP.Nos.17423o&o17424oofo2025

22.07.2025 PageoNo.5oofo5