R. Savithri vs S.Annam @ Annalakshmi — CRP/2394/2026

Case under U/a 227 Constitution of India Section 1. Next hearing: 16th July 2026.

Next hearing 16-Jul-2026

CNR: HCMA010789702026

Filing Number

CRP/58284/2026

Filing Date

01-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRP/2394/2026

Registration Date

17-Apr-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose

Coram

Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Civil Revision Petition ( 166 )

Sub-Category

Article 227 of the Constitution of India ( 44 )

Judicial Branch

JUDICIALSECTION

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

U/a 227 Constitution of India Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.R. Savithri

    Adv. A.Rajakumar,M. Sudhan,M. Sudhan, V. Ranjitha,M. Sudhan

  2. 2.Y.R. Soundravalli

  3. 3.Y.R. Amutha

  4. 4.R. Selvasubramaniam

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.S.Annam @ Annalakshmi

Case History

  1. 16-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Jul-2026

    For Admission

    Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose

  3. 04-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice Abdul QuddhoseView PDF

    Case Summary: CRP No. 2394/2026 The Madras High Court granted an interim stay of domestic violence proceedings (D.V.C. No. 28/2025) against the petitioners (in-laws of the respondent) after finding a prima facie case. The petitioners challenged the proceedings, claiming they had no involvement in the matrimonial dispute and that the respondent never resided with them. Notice was issued to the respondent returnable by 16.07.2026, with the matter posted for further hearing on that date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 04-Jun-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 01-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRP/2394/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRP No. 2394/2026 The Madras High Court granted an interim stay of domestic violence proceedings (D.V.C. No. 28/2025) against the petitioners (in-laws of the respondent) after finding a prima facie case. The petitioners challenged the proceedings, claiming they had no involvement in the matrimonial dispute and that the respondent never resided with them. Notice was issued to the respondent returnable by 16.07.2026, with the matter posted for further hearing on that date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case