C.R.P.No.4406 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 06.02.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE THIRU JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA C.R.P.No.4406 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.26658 of 2023 K.Sathish Kumar .... Petitioner vs Thenmozhi .... Respondent Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC against the order dated 21.06.2022 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in HMOP No.394 of 2018 on the file of Additional Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Tamilavel For Respondent : Ms.R.Kanishca for M/s.Nathan & Associates O R D E R The present petition is filed to set aside the order passed by the learned Additional Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in HMOP No.394 of 2018. 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.4406 of 2023 2. The learned Additional Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore had allowed I.A.No.2 of 2021 and condoned the delay of 890 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte order passed against the respondent/wife on 12.10.2018. 3. The brief facts of the case is as follows:- The petitioner is the husband and the respondent is the wife. They got married on 05.09.2016. The respondent/wife had left the matrimonial home, thereby, petitioner/husband filed a petition in HMOP No.394 of 2018 under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking for restitution of conjugal rights. The case was posted on 11.04.2018, 06.06.2018, 20.06.2018 and finally on 24.07.2018 for counseling. Since the respondent/wife did not appear before the Court on 24.07.2018, she was set ex parte on 24.07.2018 and an ex parte order came to be passed on 12.10.2018. Thereafter, the respondent/wife contending that due to mental stress she could not contact her counsel in time, filed a petition in I.A.No.02 of 2021 to condone the delay of 890 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex parte order passed against her on 12.10.2018. 4. The petitioner/husband filed a counter stating that the petitioner had 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.4406 of 2023 filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights in 2018 and order was passed on 12.10.2018, however, the respondent/wife had not taken any steps for re-union. Thereafter, the petitioner/husband filed a petition for the relief of dissolution of marriage in HMOP No.244 of 2020 and during the proceedings, the respondent/wife had come forward with a petition to drag on the proceedings and they are living separately from the year 2017. 5. The learned Judge, finding that the delay was on account of mental stress and also finding that due to Covid Pandemic, lock down was implemented by the Government periodically, allowed the application in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in HMOP No.394 of 2018. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner/husband would submit that the learned Additional Principal Family Judge has erred in condoning the delay without sufficient cause being shown by the respondent/wife and thereby, the petitioner/husband seeks to set aside the order. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.4406 of 2023 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/wife would submit that the respondent/wife is ready and willing to join with the petitioner/husband, whereas, the petitioner/husband though had filed an application, seeking for restitution of conjugal rights, had not taken steps to take the respondent/wife to the matrimonial house, but, subsequently, filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.244 of 2020 for dissolution of marriage. Learned counsel further submits that the respondent/wife is still ready to join with the petitioner/husband and she is contesting the petition filed by the petitioner/husband in HMOP No.244 of 2020 for the relief of dissolution of marriage. Learned counsel further submits that no prejudice had been caused to the petitioner by condoning the delay and both the cases can be tried together and the respondent/wife is also ready to co-operate for speedy disposal of both matters. 7. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 8. The learned Family Judge, finding that the respondent/ wife was suffering from mental stress and further the delay was on account of Covid 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.4406 of 2023 Pandemic, condoned the delay. I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Additional Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in HMOP No.394 of 2018 dated 21.06.2022. 9. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, a direction is issued to the learned Additional Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore to try HMOP No.394 of 2018 and HMOP No.244 of 2020 jointly and pass orders in accordance with law with a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The parties are directed to co-operate for speedy disposal of the cases. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 06.02.2025 sr Index:yes/no website:yes/no To The Additional Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.No.4406 of 2023 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J,. sr CRP No.4406 of 2023 06.02.2025 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis