IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 23RD BHADRA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 701 of 2008() --------------------------------- CMP.3729/07 IN CC.247/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------ K. UMMER, S/O.PULIKKAL MUHAMMEDUNNI, AGED 68 YEARS, KADAPPURATHAKATH, HOUSE NO.1128, AYISHA MANZIL, PALLIKANDI, VATTAKUND, POST KALLAYI-3, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------- 1. DILEEP KUMAR, S/O.PADMANABHAN, AGED 35 YEARS, KUNNATH VEED, ANYATH KULANGARA, CHELANNUR, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING S.I. OF POLICE, CHEMMANGAD POLICE STATION. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.AMJAD ALI. R1 BY ADV. MR.JOSE KURIAKOSE (VILANGATTIL). THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NO. 701 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18th day of February, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed to issue a direction to the Family Court, Malappuram to keep in abeyance the coercive steps for levy of maintenance and to give opportunity to the petitioner, respondent therein to contest the claim. The matter came up before this Court earlier as R.P.(FC)125/07 and the learned Judge of this Court disposed of the matter directing the revision petitioner to deposit the entire arrears due at the rate of Rs.1,000/- to the first petitioner and Rs.800/- per month to the 2nd petitioner. He was given an opportunity to contest the case. The said amount was deposited and now it is submitted that coercive steps are being taken to realise the amount at the same rate by the Court. It may appear that the Court has not disposed of the case. But Annexure 2 is a petition filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C wherein the wife and child had specifically stated, CRL.M.C. 701 OF 2009 -:2:- “Pursuant to the said direction, the respondent had deposited the amount ordered by this Hon'ble Court and later trial was held and even subsequently the Family Court found that the order passed earlier is only just and proper and he same direction regarding payment of monthly maintenance was ordered.” 2. So if after remand the matter has been finally disposed and the same amount has been ordered nothing will stand in the way of realisation of the said amount in accordance with law. But if the matter is not finally disposed of by the Court I direct the Court below not to proceed with the recovery of the amount till a final decision is taken on the matter. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-