- (1.)THE present revision is directed against the order of the learned Principal Family Judge at Chennai dated 06.01.2011 made in I.A.No.3040 of 2010 in FCOP No.569 of 2004.
(2.)THE respondent in this revision, who is the wife of the petitioner has filed the said O.P for dissolution of marriage that took place between them on 17.04.2002. In the said O.P, the petitioner has taken out an application in I.A.No.3040 of 2010 seeking permission to lead the evidence through Video Conferencing in the O.P as well as in the Interlocutory Applications. The said application was dismissed by the Court referred to above and the present revision is directed against the said order.
(3.)THE reason for filing the said application as put forth in the affidavit in nut shell are stated here under: He is a permanent resident in U.S.A and he is unable to come and lead evidence in person in view of his pre -occupation in his career. He is not able to conduct the trial personally because he is unable to get leave from his employer. The terms and conditions of his work are very severe because of the recession prevalent in the U.S.A. Though, he was at Chennai, in view of the various proceedings by the respondent herein, he was unable to get on with the matter. For effective adjudication of the matter, he has to be permitted to lead evidence through video conferencing.
The said application was opposed by the respondent herein. It is stated that in order to effectively cross -examine the petitioner, his personal appearance is necessary. She may have to mark certain documents through him and the same cannot be done through video conferencing.