Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 175987 (MAD)

LAVANYA v. SIVAKUMAR

CRP/3891/2025 · 2025-12-11

S Sounthar

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

C.R.P.No.3891 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.12.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR C.R.P.No.3891 of 2025 Lavanya ... Petitioner vs. Sivakumar ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the return the articles in Cr.M.P.No.441 of 2025 in D.V.C.No.08 of 2024 dismissed on 05.08.2025 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate-II, Poonamallee till the pending disposal of the above Civil Revision Petition. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Padmanabhan For Respondent : No Appearance 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.3891 of 2025 O R D E R The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Poonamallee in Cr.M.P.No.441 of 2025 in D.V.C.No.08 of 2024, dated 05.08.2025 dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner seeking to return of jewels. 2. The petitioner herein filed a petition in Cr.M.P.No.441 of 2025 seeking a direction to the respondent to return of 15 ½ sovereigns of gold jewels of the petitioner, which are in the custody of the respondent. The said petition was dismissed by the leaned Magistrate and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come before this Court. 3. Though it was claimed by the petitioner that at time of marriage, gold jewels of 15 ½ sovereigns were presented to the petitioner and the same are in custody of the respondent. The petitioner failed to produce any acceptable evidence to show an entrustment of jewels to the respondent. The petitioner only produced certain bills for purchase of the gold jewels. Based on the bills produced by the petitioner, we cannot presume that gold jewels allegedly purchased by the petitioner were entrusted with the respondent. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.3891 of 2025 4. In the absence of any evidence to show that the gold jewels were entrusted with the respondent and the same are in the custody of the respondent, the Judicial Magistrate rightly dismissed the application. I do not find any error in the impugned order passed by the Judicial Magistrate-II, Poonamallee in Cr.M.P.No.441 of 2025 in D.V.C.No.08 of 2024, dated 05.08.2025. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. 11.12.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No dm To The Judicial Magistrate-II, Poonamallee. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.3891 of 2025 S.SOUNTHAR, J. dm C.R.P.No.3891 of 2025 11.12.2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis