R.Rajasekar v. P.Vinothini

ORDER Today, the matter is listed under the caption "for being mentioned" at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶2It is brought to the notice of this Court that some error has been crept in paragraph No.7 of the order dated 27.11.2025. The said paragraph Nos. 7 is to be replaced as follows: "7. For the foregoing reasons the order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Chengalpet in F.C.M.C.No.1 of 2020 on 24.12.2024 is hereby confirmed and this Criminal Revision case is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. It is made clear that the maintenance amount should be calculated at the rate of Rs.12,000/- per month from the date of 24.12.2024 i.e., final order passed in F.C.M.C.No.1 of 2020, failing which the respondent is at liberty to take action against the petitioner in the manner known to law."

¶3Registry is directed to incorporate the above paragraph No.7 in the order dated 27.11.2025, and issue fresh order copy to the parties forthwith.

¶4In all other respects, the order dated 27.11.2025, in the above Criminal Revision case shall remain unaltered. 11-02-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order rri To

1.P.Vinothini W/o.Rajasekar, D/o.Paulraj, No.35, 2nd Street, Priya Nagar, Urapakkam - 603 210, Kanchipuram District.

2.The Family Judge, Chengalpet. T.V.THAMILSELVI J. rri CRL RC No. 1946 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.18626 of 2025

11-02-2026

Crl.R.C.No. 1946 of 2025 T.V.THAMILSELVI, J. This matter was taken up for hearing under the caption "For Being Mentioned" today at the instance of the respondent/party in person. 2.The respondent appeared in person and submitted that on 11.02.2026, the revision petitioner listed the matter under the caption "For being mentioned" and obtained the order as if there was error in the order passed by this court on 27.11.2025 in paragraph No.7 and it was rectified directing the revision petitioner to pay the maintenance of Rs.12,000/- per month from the date of final order i.e. on 24.12.2024 passed in F.C.M.C.No.1 of 2020. Aggrieved that modification, the respondent wife listed the matter today under the caption "For being mentioned" 3. The respondent/party-in-person filed a memo contending that from the date of filing of maintenance petition, she is entitled to receive maintenance amount and the same was rightly ordered by this court vide order dated 27.11.2025, but the order made in para 7 was recalled vide order dated 11.02.2026. Therefore, she prayed to restore the modified order. 4. On perusal of records, the fact reveals that respondent filed a petition in F.C.M.C.No.1 of 2020 before the Family Court, Chenglepet and interim maintenance was ordered and the said direction is in dispute in the Criminal Revision case. 5. Furthermore, on perusal of the order passed by this court on 27.11.2025, it reveals that a sum of Rs.12,000/- was directed to be paid to the respondent wife from the date of petition, but subsequently, it was modified by this court by an order dated 11.02.2026 modifying the same as the maintenance amount should be calculated at the rate of Rs.12,000/- per month from the date of final order i.e. 24.12.2024 passed in F.C.M.C.No.1 of 2020. It is a settled proposition that the maintenance is to be paid from the date of filing the petition and not from the date of final order passed by the trial judge. Therefore, the earlier order passed by this court on 11.02.2026 requires interference. 6. Admittedly, the interim maintenance was paid by the husband, he is directed to pay arrears of maintenance from the date of filing of petition in F.C.M.C.No.1 of 2020 and also directed to pay a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month without any default. Therefore, the operative portion of the order passed by this court on 11.02.2026 in para 2 shall be substituted as follows:- "7. For the foregoing reasons, the order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Chengalpet in F.C.M.C.No.01 of 2020 on 24.12.2024 is hereby confirmed and this Criminal Revision case is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. It is made clear that the maintenance amount should be calculated at the rate of Rs.12,000/- from the date of filing the petition in F.C.M.C.No. 01 of 2020, failing which the respondent is at liberty to take action against the petitioner in the manner known to law." 7. Registry is directed to incorporate above modification in the Order of this Court passed in Crl.R.C.No.1946 of 2025 dated 27.11.2025 and issue fresh order copy to the parties forthwith. 27.03.2026 rpp T .V.THAMILSELVI, J. rpp Crl.R.C.No. 1946 of 2025 27.03.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11-02-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRL RC No. 1946 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.18626 of 2025 1. R.Rajasekar S/o.Ramanujam, No.258/118, Mettu Street, Chengalpet - 603 002, Kanchipuram District. Petitioner(s) Vs 1. P.Vinothini W/o.Rajasekar, D/o.Paulraj, No.35, 2nd Street, Priya Nagar, Urapakkam - 603 210, Kanchipuram District. Respondent(s) PRAYER To set aside the order of the learned Judge, Family Court, Chengalpet, passed in F.C.M.C.No.01/2020 dated 24.12.2024. For Petitioner(s): MR.S.V.Karthikeyan For Respondent(s): No Appearance