CRP/6038/2026 of Sharan Thandlam Sudhindra Vs Lavanya Venugopal on 30 September 2026

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal order passed in IA.No.3 of

CRP No. 6038 of 2026

2024 in OP.No.3119 of 2024 on the file of the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai dated 23.02.2026 wherein the application filed by the respondent to restrain the petitioner from communicating with her in any manner or form, pending disposal of the O.P, came to be allowed by the Court below.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the materials available on record as well as the order passed by the Court below.

3. The respondent has filed O.P.No.3119 of 2024 seeking for dissolution of marriage solemnised on 07.08.2018 on the ground of cruelty. Pending the said petition, IA No.3 of 2024 came to be filed by the respondent on the ground that the petitioner is repeatedly causing harassment to the respondent by sending emails and making phone calls. In such circumstances, the respondent sought for injunction restraining the petitioner from contacting her in any manner or form.

4. The petitioner took a defence that he is residing at Singapore and that he has already initiated guardianship proceedings in OP.No.178 of 2025 before this Court and by consent of both sides, an interim order came to be passed on 13.11.2025, which enabled the petitioner to meet the child on alternate Saturdays during a specified time. According to the petitioner, the

CRP No. 6038 of 2026

respondent was not complying with the said order and was not permitting the petitioner to visit the child and therefore, the petitioner was attempting to get in touch with the respondent. In view of the same, the petitioner sought for the dismissal of the application.

5. The Court below considering the volume of emails and phone calls made by the petitioner, came to conclusion that the same resulted in harassment of the respondent and passed the interim order. Aggrieved by this order, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed before this court.

6. In the considered view of this Court, the order passed by the Court below could have actually brought peace to both the petitioner as well as respondent, since the Court below has restrained both the parties from getting in touch with each other so that they can lead their lives peacefully. However, the problem is that the petitioner wants to desperately meet the child in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 13.11.2025. The child is admittedly in the custody of the respondent and therefore, the petitioner has to necessarily get in touch with the respondent to fix the place and time, as was ordered by this Court. Since, it is alleged that there is no co-operation on the side of the respondent, the petitioner seems to have got into a desperation mode and has repeatedly sent emails and made phone calls, since he has to come from Singapore and has to make arrangements.

CRP No. 6038 of 2026

7. The core issue lies in the petitioner being prevented from visiting the child in terms of the order passed by this Court in Application No.1710 of 2025. If the respondent is not complying with the said order, the petitioner has to approach the Court and workout his remedy in the manner known to law. Sending repeated emails and making repeated phone calls is not going to yield any result. In view of the same, the order passed by the Court below as such does not suffer from any perversity.

8. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that taking advantage of the order passed by the Court below, the respondent has also given a complaint to the police as if there is domestic violence in view of repeated emails and phone calls made by the petitioner. This Consequence seems to be the main grievance on the part of the petitioner.

9. It is made clear that petitioner can work out his remedy with reference to the visitation rights by filing an appropriate application in OP.No.178 of 2025. It is also made clear that no criminal proceedings shall be initiated against the petitioner merely based on the order passed by the Court below in IA.No.3 of 2024 in OP.No.3119 of 2024 dated 23.02.2026, since no element of criminality is involved for the police to proceed further. This

CRP No. 6038 of 2026

observation will sufficiently take care of the grievance expressed by the petitioner.

10. This Civil Revision Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 30-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RKA To The IV Additional Principle Judge, Family Court, Chennai.

CRP No. 6038 of 2026

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. RKA CRP No. 6038 of 2026 30-09-2026