IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931 RPFC.No. 224 of 2007() -------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01/12/2006 IN CMP.145, 146/2006 IN MC.396/1999 of .................... REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONERR/RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------- HUSSAIN, S/O.MUHAMMED, CHERIKUNNUMMAL HOUSE, NEAR PUTHIYASTAND, PANDIKKAD ROAD, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------- 1. A.T.HAMEEDA, D/O.ALI, ARAYAMTHOPPU PARAMBU, CHAKKALATHOPPU PARAMBU, 14/556, FRANCIS ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 2. FATHIMA HUDA, D/O.HUSSAIN, MINOR REPRESENTED BY 1ST RESPONDENT A.T.HAMEEDA. R1 BY ADV. SMT.T.KAMALA MENON THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... R.P.(F.C).No.224 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 17th day of February, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Kozhikode in C.M.P.Nos.145/2006 & 146/2006 in M.C.No.396/1999. M.C.No.396/1999 was disposed of by ordering to make payment of Rs.350/= to the wife and Rs.250/= to the daughter. Then an application was moved as CMP.No.1045/2003 for variance under Section 127 of Cr.P.C and the court passed an order, as the respondent therein remained ex parte, at the rate of Rs.1,500/= to the wife and Rs.1,250/= to the daughter. 2. These applications were filed to condone the delay and to set aside the ex parte order. Along with the revision, various photocopies of the documents relating to treatment are produced whereby it is contended that he was laid up with rheumatism, cardiac problem and high blood sugar which disabled him to appear before the court in time. 3. I cannot find fault with the order of the family court for the reason that non of these documents were made available for consideration by marking the same before the : 2 : R.P.(F.C).No.224 OF 2007 court. On a perusal of the treatment records made available before me, I feel that an opportunity has to be given to contest the case regarding condonation of delay as well as setting aside the ex parte order. 4.Therefore, the order under challenge, C.M.P.Nos.145/2006 & 146/2006 in M.C.No.396/1999, is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the family court for consideration of those applications and for the said purpose, the parties are directed to produce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and let the matter be disposed of in accordance with law. Till a final decision is taken in the matter, the revision petitioner is directed to make payment of Rs.1,000/= to the wife and Rs.750/= to the daughter. Being an old matter, let there be an expeditious disposal. If the wife does not appear before the court on the date of appearance, the revision petitioner is directed to take out notice to her for her appearance. Parties are directed to appear before the family court on 15.3.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : R.P.(F.C).No.224 OF 2007 : 4 : R.P.(F.C).No.224 OF 2007