HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CONTEMPT CASE No.1031 of 2009 Between: Kodal Harinarayan ……….Petitioner and P.Ramanaiah ………..Respondent HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY CONTEMPT CASE No.1031 of 2009 ORDER: This contempt case is filed by the petitioner in Crl.R.C.No.921 of 2009, on the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, seeking punishment to the respondent, on the ground that the respondent has willfully disobeyed and deliberately flouted interim suspension order, dated 11-06-2009, passed in Crl.R.C.No.921 of 2009. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent-contemnor. Perused the records. 3. The petitioner herein filed Crl.R.C.No.921 of 2009 against the orders dated 31-05-2009 in I.A.No.68 of 2009 in O.P.No.993 of 2008, where under, the petitioner herein was directed to pay interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the 1st petitioner-wife and Rs.2,000/- to the 2nd petitioner-daughter therein including arrears. This Court, by order dated, 11-06-2009 in Crl.R.C.No.921 of 2009, directed interim suspension of the said impugned order, subject to condition that the petitioner herein shall deposit 50% of arrears of maintenance as awarded by the trial Court within six weeks and continue to pay at Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.1000/- per month to the daughter by 10th of every succeeding month. 4. According to the petitioner, the interim order of this Court was duly complied with by making the payments in time. He alleges that in spite of having knowledge of the interim order of suspension passed by this Court, the respondent-contemnor directed N.B.W. to issue against the petitioner herein and thereby he willfully disobeyed the interim order passed by this Court. 5. The respondent contemnor filed a counter stating that no further steps were taken in O.PNo.993 of 2008 subsequent to passing of the interim order passed by this Court and the N.B.W. was pending in some other matter i.e. O.P.No.992 of 2008, which was filed by the wife of the petitioner herein under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights, as the petitioner herein was not appearing before the Court in spite of several adjournments granted for the purpose of reconciliation. 6. It is not disputed that the petitioner’s wife filed O.P.No.992 of 2008 for restitution of conjugal rights and petitioner’s wife and daughter filed another O.P.No.993 of 2008 for maintenance and both are pending before the Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam. Only in O.P.No.993 of 2008, petitioner’s wife and daughter filed I.A.No.68 of 2008 seeking interim maintenance and against the order passed therein, granting interim maintenance, the revision was filed and this court by interim order suspended the operation of the impugned order, subject to payment of interim maintenance as stated above. There is no proceeding pending before this Court pertaining to O.P.No.992 of 2008, nor any interim order passed therein. 7. As seen from the counter filed by the respondent- contemnor, O.P.No.992 of 2008 was being adjourned from time to time for reconciliation and in spite of several adjournments, posting the matter to 27-04-2009, 06-05-2009, 13-05-2009, 18-06-2009 and 03-07-2009, the petitioner herein did not appear before the Court though the wife was attending, and therefore, in order to secure the presence of petitioner herein, the contemnor issued N.B.W. against the petitioner herein in O.P.No.992 of 2008. 8. The petitioner himself filed a copy of the docket proceedings in both O.P.Nos.992 and 993 of 2008. As can be seen from the matters, O.P.No.992 of 2008 was coming up for reconciliation on several dates mentioned above and on 03-07-2009, N.B.W. was issued as the petitioner herein (respondent therein) was absent, and posted the matter to 24-07-2009. It can also be seen from the above docket proceedings that no further steps were taken in O.P.No.993 of 2008, subsequent to passing of interim order by this Court. No doubt, in the docket order, dated 03-07-2009 in O.P.No.992 of 2008, it was mentioned that the amount was not deposited as per the orders of the High Court. 9. Admittedly, by that date i.e. 03-07-2009, the amounts were not deposited in pursuance of the interim order of this Court. Of course, 50% of the arrears of maintenance were paid on 11-07-2009 and the monthly maintenance was paid on 06-07-2009 both within the time granted by this Court. There is no factual error in mentioning on 03-07-2009 on the docket that amount was not deposited as per the orders of this Court, as by that date, the amount was not, in fact, deposited. 10. That apart, when there is no interim order of suspension or stay, granted in O.P.No.992 of 2008, the learned Additional Judge, Family Court, was certainly at liberty to proceed further with the matter and take all necessary steps for effecting reconciliation. When N.B.W. was not ordered to be issued in O.P.No.993 of 2008 and the same was issued in another O.P.No.992 of 2008, though the dispute is between the same parties, the question of violating any orders of this Court does not simply arise as there is no interim order passed by this court pertaining to the proceedings in O.P.No.992 of 2008. 11. The purport of the interim order passed by this Court is only to suspend the operation of the impugned order passed in O.P.No.993 of 2008 granting interim maintenance by the Family Court subject of course to the compliance with the conditions imposed by this Court. It does not, however, stop further proceedings in O.P.No.992 of 2008, in respect of which no proceeding is pending before this Court. 12. Therefore, the present contempt case filed by the petitioner is totally misconceived and is devoid of any merits and is nothing but an abuse of process of law. 13. In the result, the Contempt Case is dismissed. ___________________ September 2009 kvr