Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2021 DAILYLAW 4297 (MAD)

K. VIGNESH @ SENTHIL KUMAR v. S. CHITRA @ DHANAM,

CMA(MD)/627/2021 · 2026-08-11

G R Swaminathan, M D Sumathi

Transfer Petitionbody2021

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

C.M.A.(MD)No.627 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.08.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE M.D.SUMATHI C.M.A.(MD)No.627 of 2021 K.Vignesh @ Senthil Kumar ... Appellant Vs. S.Chitra @ Dhanam ... Respondent Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 r/w. Order XLI Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the order and decree made in O.P.No.118 of 2020, dated 29.04.2021 on the file of the Family Court, Theni. For Appellant : Mr.V.P.Rajan For Respondent : Mr.S.A.Ajmal Khan JUDGMENT (By G.R.Swaminathan, J.) The appellant herein got married to the respondent on 19.05.2016 as per Hindu rites and customs. A girl child was born through the 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.(MD)No.627 of 2021 wedlock on 02.07.2018. The relationship between the parties came under strain. The appellant filed O.P.No.118 of 2020 on the file of Family Court, Theni seeking dissolution of his marriage. The respondent filed O.P.No.244 of 2020 seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Both the parties adduced evidence. The husband examined himself as P.W.1 and Exs.P1 to P6 were marked. The wife examined herself as R.W.1 and Exs.R1 to R6 were marked. After hearing both the parties and considering the evidence on record, the learned Trial Judge vide common order dated 29.04.2021 dismissed O.P.No.118 of 2020 and allowed O.P.No.244 of 2020. 2.The appellant felt aggrieved by the said outcome. But he filed only this appeal arising out of his divorce petition. The order allowing the petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the wife remains unchallenged. 3.Where two connected suits are tried together and finding recorded in one suit became final, in absence of appeal, appeal preferred against the finding recorded in the other suit would be barred by res 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.(MD)No.627 of 2021 judicata (vide Premier Tyres Ltd., v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, 1993 Supp (2) SCC 146, Lonankutty v. Thomman and another, , Sheodan Singh v. Daryao Kunwar, AIR 1996 SC 1332 and Vediammal and others v. M. Kandasamy and others, 1997 TLNJ 96). What applies to suits applies to original petitions also. 4.This appeal is dismissed as barred by res judicata. No costs. (G.R.S. J.,) & (M.D.S. J.,) 11.08.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias/skm To: The Family Court, Theni. Copy to: The Section Officer, ER/VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.(MD)No.627 of 2021 G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. and M.D.SUMATHI , J. ias/skm C.M.A.(MD)No.627 of 2021 11.08.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis