IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2010 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6658 of 2010(R) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- NOUSHAD P.E., AGED 50, S/O. IBRAHIM, PUTHUPARAMBIL, PAINGANA, MUNDAKAYAM P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, TALUK OFFICE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. MUMTHAS BEEGUM, THEKKETHIL VEETTIL, VETTIPURAM MURI, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. R1 BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.6658 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. 1.Having regard to the nature of the orders being issued hereunder, we dispense with notice to the respondents, preserving their right for re-hearing of the matter, if aggrieved. 2.The petitioner has a wife and child. They moved the Family Court, Thiruvalla in 2006 and obtained an order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs.150/- per month to the wife and Rs.1,000/- per month to the child. On default, they sought enforcement of that order. Revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated. Notice under Section 7 of the Revenue Recovery Act was issued on 22.10.2009. With this, the petitioner contends that the order WPC.6658/10. 2 on the MC case was passed ex parte and that he has applied to set aside that order. We note that the petitioner does not dispute the marriage or the paternity of the child. We also note that he was represented in the MC proceedings through counsel. Taking all the facts into consideration and the offer of the petitioner that he intends to cohabit with the first respondent and take care of the child, we are inclined to grant an order of stay of revenue recovery proceedings on condition, till consideration of any application to set aside the ex parte order provided such an application has already been filed. 3.In the result, this writ petition is ordered directing that if the petitioner remits an amount of Rs.30,000/- before the court below within a period of two weeks from now, further revenue recovery proceedings on the basis of Ext.P3 order shall stand suspended until the consideration and disposal of any application pending seeking setting aside Ext.P3 order. The amount on deposit will be released to the first respondent for herself and on behalf of the second respondent. If there is no WPC.6658/10. 3 petition before the court below to set aside Ext.P3 order, this writ petition will stand dismissed. The Office will communicate copy of this judgment to the court below and to the first respondent. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.S.GOPINATHAN, Judge. kkb.3/03.