Tamil Nadu   

Family courts should not issue summons mechanically: Court

Special Correspondent

A man, who claimed to have married actress Sridevi, asked to pay Rs. 1 lakh

CHENNAI: Family courts should not receive petitions, number them and issue summons mechanically, the Madras High Court has cautioned.

Justice A. Kulasekaran made the observation and imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on V. Ramakrishna Gowd, who claimed to have married and lived with actress Sridevi. He had moved the family court here for restitution of conjugal rights.

After the court issued notice to her, Ms. Sridevi filed the present civil revision petition in the High Court, seeking to quash the family court proceedings.

Mr. Justice Kulasekaran directed Mr. Gowd to pay the amount to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority within three months.

"He is a person in the habit of filing false and vexatious cases against cine and political personalities with an ulterior motive, knowing well that it would affect their reputation. Admittedly, he was convicted already. However, he repeats the same by filing the petition against Ms. Sridevi without a right to sue or cause of action."

The judge pointed out the mechanical manner in which summonses were issued by subordinate judiciary.

"It is the duty of the trial court to read the plaint, not formally, but in a meaningful way. And, if the petition is manifestly vexatious and meritless, not disclosing a fair right to sue, the court should exercise its power."

Noting that the courts must nip in the bud any "illusion of cause of action", Mr. Justice Kulasekaran said: "The penal code is also resourceful enough to meet such men. The code must be triggered against them."

Referring to the case on hand, the judge said the "wedding invitation", furnished by Mr. Gowd identified the "groom" as "former husband of Jayapradha, cine artist." "The invitation itself is shabby, substandard, strange, unusual, and the way in which Mr. Gowd projected himself as former husband of Jayapradha discloses his ulterior motive. The invitation is not trustworthy, and the court is of the view that the alleged marriage between him and Ms. Sridevi is not at all proved."

As for his claim that a Tenali court had passed an order in his favour and that he lived with the actress for some time afterwards, Mr. Justice Kulasekaran said: "The trial court should have been cautious and insisted on production of the documents concerned. But no such efforts were taken by the family court... When the petition suffers from vital defect, the court should not issue summons and proceed with trial without any triable issue. Permitting such suit would tantamount to licensing frivolous and vexatious litigation. That cannot be done."

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Manimuthaaru revived
Adorn your houses with lamps
National disaster
Vaigai water
Karthigai deepam speaks the language of love
And then my heart with pleasure fills ...
Pleasant sight
Man clubs brother to death near Pallavaram
Desalination plant relevance questioned
Over Rs. 8 cr. given to relief fund
Vaigai dam overflows
Family courts should not issue summons mechanically: Court
Waste plastic prolongs roads' life
Briefly

Copyright © 2005, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu