THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:1274 of 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 30.04.2008, in I.A.No.789 of 2007 in O.P.No.624 of 2004 on the file of the learned Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, wherein the said application filed by the petitioner herein seeking dismissal of the O.P., was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the records. 3. Respondents herein filed O.P.No.624 of 2004 under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) for recovery of Rs.2,23,000/- towards marriage expenses of her daughter and Rs.2000/- per month towards future maintenance. Petitioner herein filed counter contesting the O.P., inter alia on the ground that the O.P. is not maintainable as both parties belong to Mohammedan community. Petitioner herein filed I.A.No.789 of 2007 seeking dismissal of the O.P. on the ground that the Act is not applicable as both parties are Muslims. The learned Judge by the impugned order, dismissed the said application by making reference to a circular issued by this Court in ROC.No.1643/SO/1995, dated 06.06.2004. 4. A perusal of the certified copy of the said circular would only show that for the purpose of ensuring uniformity of procedure in the registration of the cases in the Family Courts, the Presiding Officers are directed to number all the cases filed before them as Original Petitions. The said circular is totally irrelevant. Making reference to the circular is unnecessary and uncalled for and dismissal of the application, filed by the petitioner in view of the said circular, is unsustainable. Admittedly, both parties are Muslims. Section 18 of the Act clearly states that the Act applies to any person, who is a Hindu by religion. 5. As either of the parties is not a Hindu and both are admittedly Muslims, the provisions of the Act are not applicable. Filing of the application by the respondents under Section 18 of the Act is misconceived. The impugned order, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner herein, is therefore set aside. Consequently, I.A.No.789 of 2007 stands allowed and O.P.No.624 of 2004 stands dismissed as not maintainable. Respondents herein are at liberty to avail other appropriate remedies available under law. 6. Civil Revision Petition is allowed accordingly with the liberty as stated above. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J 24th August, 2011. Tsy