‘Out-Of-Box Thinking Required’ To Resolve Marital Disputes From COVID-Era Marriages: Madras HC [Read Order]

Chennai: The Madras High Court has upheld a Family Court order fixing interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000 per month under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and has directed all Principal District Judges in Tamil Nadu to collect data on matrimonial disputes arising from marriages solemnised between 2020 and 2022, observing that such cases form a separate category requiring a different approach.

Justice N. Anand Venkatesh was hearing a Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, challenging the order dated 30.03.2026 passed by the Sub Court, Alandur, in I.A. No. 2 of 2025 in O.P. No. 377 of 2023. On the respondent's application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the trial court had fixed Rs. 10,000 as interim maintenance payable by the petitioner to the respondent.

When the revision petition was entertained on 14.07.2026, the High Court had directed the petitioner, as an interim measure, to pay maintenance at Rs. 7,000 per month along with the arrears fixed under the impugned order. The Court noted that the arrears had been paid and that the monthly maintenance was being paid at the reduced rate.

Dismissing the challenge on merits, the Court held that the trial court had properly exercised its discretion and that the amount fixed was reasonable and not exorbitant. It therefore declined to exercise its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 and sustained the order.

As the petitioner had paid only Rs. 7,000 per month under the interim order, the Court directed him to remit the balance arrears of maintenance within four weeks of receipt of the order. Noting that the original petition dates back to 2023, it also directed the Sub Court, Alandur, to dispose of O.P. No. 377 of 2023 within four months. The revision petition was disposed of without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

Before concluding, the Court made wider observations on matrimonial litigation. It noted that in the last three months, in almost every matrimonial dispute reaching the Court, the marriage had taken place between 2019 and 2022. In more than 95% of such cases, the parties had hardly lived together for six to nine months, and in some cases only three months, a period that coincided with the pandemic lockdown.

The Court observed that the pandemic had not only taken lives but had also damaged the institution of marriage, as being confined in the same house exposed the best and worst aspects of the parties' characters and put them under pressure about their future, directly affecting the marital relationship. Holding that such disputes must be treated as a separate category, the Court said that “out of box thinking is required to resolve these disputes.”

Accordingly, the Court directed all Principal District Judges across Tamil Nadu to collect data from the Family Courts and other courts handling matrimonial disputes relating to marriages that took place between 2020 and 2022, and to place it before the Court before the next date of hearing. If the data is made available, the Court said it would seek the assistance of counsel with rich experience in Family Court disputes to explore a different kind of solution, expressing confidence that the step would help many families come together by resolving disputes amicably.

A copy of the order was directed to be marked to all Principal District Judges, and the matter has been posted under the caption “For Filing Report” on 27.11.2026.

Appearances:

For the Petitioner: Mr. CH. Mohith Sai, Advocate.

For the Respondent: Mr. A.M. Packianathan Easter, assisted by Mr. Agathian J. Pandian, for M/s. Easter Legal.

Case Title: S vs. S, CRP No. 3799 of 2026

[Read Order]