S.Mathivanan vs S.Archana — 3/2025

Case under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section U/Sec.13(1). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.

OP - Original Petition

CNR: TNTM220000212025

Evidence

Next Hearing

23rd June 2026

Filing Number

25/2025

Filing Date

02-01-2025

Registration No

3/2025

Registration Date

02-01-2025

Court

Sub Court, Polur

Judge

3-Subordinate Judge, Polur

Acts & Sections

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section U/Sec.13(1)

Petitioner(s)

S.Mathivanan

Respondent(s)

S.Archana

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Subordinate Judge, Polur

02-06-2026

Evidence

16-04-2026

Evidence

02-04-2026

Evidence

13-03-2026

Evidence

24-02-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

16-04-2026
Copy of Deposition

Case Summary: 3/2025 - S. Mathivanan v. S. Archana Case Status: Cross-examination of witness completed on April 16, 2026. This appears to be a matrimonial dispute where the respondent (S. Archana) testified under oath regarding marital issues with the petitioner. The witness testified that she received dowry of gold ornaments and household items worth 10 lakhs at marriage, has lived separately from her husband for 4 years at her mother's house, and refused reconciliation attempts despite his single phone call asking her to return. She denied fulfilling marital duties and claimed her husband was instigated by his family members to confine her. The court completed the cross-examination; no final order on the petition's merits is reflected in this document. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 3/2025 - S. Mathivanan v. S. Archana Case Status: Cross-examination of witness completed on April 16, 2026. This appears to be a matrimonial dispute where the respondent (S. Archana) testified under oath regarding marital issues with the petitioner. The witness testified that she received dowry of gold ornaments and household items worth 10 lakhs at marriage, has lived separately from her husband for 4 years at her mother's house, and refused reconciliation attempts despite his single phone call asking her to return. She denied fulfilling marital duties and claimed her husband was instigated by his family members to confine her. The court completed the cross-examination; no final order on the petition's merits is reflected in this document. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Sub Court, Polur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case