Stay on wedding of controversial ‘legal adviser’

NEWS- Stay on Wedding of controversial ‘legal adviser’

BLOG/ NEWS

A family court in Madurai has stayed the “booked marriage” of B Ramasamy, said to be a legal counsel to a few individuals from Parliament, to a Rajya Sabha part from Tamil Nadu in New Delhi on March 26. There had been media reports recognizing the MP as Sasikala Pushpa.

In any case, this couldn’t be affirmed with either Ramasamy or Sasikala Pushpa. The family court’s request went ahead an appeal to recorded by T Sathyapriya of Villapuram against Ramasamy looking for compensation of her marital rights. She additionally moved an interlocutory application looking to concede order controlling Ramasamy from proceeding with the marriage. She said she had gained from news reports that her significant other was going to wed another lady without getting a substantial separation. Sathyapriya had additionally presented a portrayal to the Madurai area gatherer on March 20 looking to stop the marriage.

The solicitor said that Ramasamy, by deception of his activity, had hitched her on December 10, 2014. She wound up pregnant and brought forth their tyke on December 23, 2016. On his part, Ramasamy claimed that the solicitor had stifled her before marriage in 2012 with a man named Palanisamy and that the separation request of documented by him (Palanisamy) under the watchful eye of the Dindigul court was pending.

Stay on wedding of controversial ‘legal adviser’

Hence, she was not qualified for record the present appeal, he said. Family court judge (incharge) N Venkadavaradan, in the wake of hearing the two sides, stated, “This endless supply of the conditions finds that the applicant has at first sight set up the subsistence of a legitimate marriage and if at all the respondent (Ramasamy) needs to have another marriage, he needs to look for a substantial alleviation under the watchful eye of the courtroom and afterward get another marriage. Henceforth, under these conditions, the court feels that it would be simply and sensible to remain the agreement of marriage, assuming any, by the respondent with some other woman till the transfer of the principle appeal.” The judge additionally said that the applicant had denied having any association with Palanisamy.

For more BLOG/ NEWs, CLICK HERE.

Leave a Reply