IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH (29TH) DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.1184 of 2011 Between: Smt. Abisetti Asha Latha @ Kakarla Asha Latha … Petitioner And: Sri Abisetti Venkat Rao …Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.1184 of 2011 ORDER: This revision petition is directed against the order dated 05.03.2011 in IA No.1051 of 2010 in FCOP No.1241 of 2010 on the ﬁle of the Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, wherein the said application ﬁled by the petitioner herein under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking a direction to the respondent to pay Rs.3 lakhs per trip towards travel and other expenses, was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The respondent herein ﬁled OP No.57 of 2008 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage by decree of divorce. The petitioner herein ﬁled counter opposing the application and making a counter claim for restitution of conjugal rights. The said case is pending enquiry. 4. As seen from the impugned order, except on one occasion i.e., 19.04.2010 the petitioner herein never attended the court and consequently, she was s e t ex-parte on 23.01.2009 and ex-parte decree was passed on 02.03.2009 and subsequently, it was set aside and OP was restored to ﬁle on 22.01.2010. Even thereafter also, the petitioner herein never appeared before the court on the pretext that she is a student, studying in United States of America and she has no independent income. The respondent herein on the other hand would contend that the petitioner is a qualiﬁed Dental Surgeon and is working as Dentist in United States and is gainfully employed. The learned Judge, Family Court, has observed that the petitioner has not denied the said allegation and she did not also furnish any details regarding her alleged pursuit of higher studies, except claiming that she is a student. 5. The petitioner ﬁled IA No.1051 of 2010 seeking direction to the respondent to pay her a sum of Rs.3 lakhs per trip towards her travel and other expenses to enable her to attend the court. Being a party to the proceedings and having chosen to contest the matter and having got ex-parte decree passed earlier set aside, the petitioner is duty bound to appear before the Family Court in connection with the enquiry in the OP and she cannot avoid appearance before the court on some pretext or other. It is to be noted that the petitioner is not claiming any amount towards maintenance on the ground that she is unable to maintain herself. In the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the application, she stated that the respondent may be directed to pay Rs.3 lakhs per trip towards travel, residence at Hyderabad, transport etc. and other incidental expenses. That the petitioner is a qualiﬁed Dentist in United States of America is not denied by her. Her claim that she is still a student does not also merit acceptance in the light of the aﬃdavit ﬁled by her father in Tr.CMP No.64 of 2010 wherein he stated that the petitioner did her MS in Fair Leigh Dickinson University in USA from August 2008 to May 2010. When the petitioner is able to survive in USA since about three years without any ﬁnancial support from the respondent, her plea that she is unable to attend the court for want of funds to meet travel expenses cannot be countenanced at all. It is obvious that the present application is ﬁled only with a view to avoid appearance before the Family Court. 6 . In the circumstances, the impugned order dismissing the application and directing the petitioner to appear before the court in connection with the proceedings in the main OP, does not call for any interference. 7. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 29.11.2011 bss