IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2010 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1931 RPFC.No. 492 of 2007() ---------------------- MC.55/2006 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------------------- SURESH BABU, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. K.G.MONEY, ATTUMALIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PADINJATTUSSERY, ANJILITHANAM P.O., KAVIYOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. MR.R.SANTHOSH BABU RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------------------- 1. OMANA S., AGED 30 YEARS, D/O.SREEDHARAN, VIPANJIKA VEEDU, THRIKKODITHANAM P.O., THRIKKODITHANAM VILLAGE, CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. SIVANANDINI (MINOR AGED 3 YEARS), -DO- -DO- (MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER 1ST RESPONDENT). R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.MANU ROY THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO.12666/2007 IN RP(FC) NO.492/2007 DISMISSED 03/03/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... R.P.(F.C).No.492 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of March,, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Thiruvalla in M.C.No.55/2006. The husband, who has been directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/= to the wife and Rs.800/= to the child, had come up in revision. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the husband did not get an opportunity to put forward his contentions. It is seen that the respondents in the MC did not adduce any evidence and the court was forced to decide the matter on the unchallenged evidence of PW1. Interest of justice requires a fair hearing and therefore I am inclined to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to put forward his contentions by adducing evidence but on condition that he shall continue to pay at the rate of Rs.950/= per month as ordered by this court towards maintenance. 3. In the result, the order passed by the family court is : 2 : R.P.(F.C).No.492 OF 2007 set aside and the matter is remitted back to the family court for fresh consideration and to grant an opportunity to both sides to adduce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. It is also made clear that the revision petitioner shall continue to pay at the rate of Rs.950/= per month to the respondents as maintenance till a final decision is taken. If there is consecutive default of payment of two months, then the court shall warn him and strike of the defence. Parties are directed to appear before the family court on 09.04.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl