IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2010 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3353 of 2009() ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP 971/09 IN CRA.392/2009 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT,-I, MAVELIKKARA MC.69/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MAVELIKKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/CR.PETITIONER -------------------------------------------- PRASANNAKUMAR, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.LATE SIVANKUTTY, NAVOLIL HOUSE, KAPPIL EAST, KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, NOW WORKING AS NAIL (LAB ASSISTANT), MILITARY HOSPITAL, WILLINGTON, NILGIRI DIST., TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.B.RENJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & STATE ---------------------------------------------- 1. S.LEKHA, D/O.SARASAMMA, LEKHA NIVAS, MATTOM SOUTH, THATTARAMBALAM P.O., KANNAMANGALAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA. 2. MEKHA P.KUMAR, OF -DO- (MINOR REPRESENTED BY NEXT FRIEND MOTHER 1ST RESPONDENT). 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.S.MOHANAN FOR R1-2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P. No. 3353 of 2009 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 11th March, 2010 ORDER The divorced first wife (Lekha) and daughter (Mekha P. Kumar) of the revision petitioner filed M.C. No. 69 of 2008 claiming Rs. 7,000/- per month as maintenance under Sec. 20 of the Protection of Women (from Domestic Violence) Act, 2005 ( PWDV Act for short). The learned Magistrate as per order dated 25-8-2009 disallowed maintenance to the wife on the ground that she is able to maintain himself but granted maintenance to the minor daughter at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per month. Aggrieved by the order disallowing maintenance to the wife, she has preferred an appeal as Crl. Appeal No. 424 of 2009 before the Addl. Sessions Court- (Fast Track) , Mavelikkara under Sec. 29 of the PWDV Act. 2. Aggrieved by the quantum of maintenance awarded to the minor child, the revision petitioner father preferred Crl. Crl.R.P. No. 3353 of 2009 -:2:- Appeal No. 392 of 2009 before the Addl. Sessions Court (Fast track), Mavelikkara . As per Crl.M.P. No. 971 of 2009 in Crl.A. No. 392 of 2009 the revision petitioner sought a stay of execution of the order of the Magistrate. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge as per the impugned order dated 17-09- 2009 dismissed the stay petition. Hence, this Revision. 3. In as much as Crl.Appeal Nos. 392 and 424 of 2009 are pending before the Addl. Sessions court, interests of justice will be adequately met by directing that Court to dispose of the appeals after giving both sides an opportunity of being heard. This Court while admitting the revision directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1500/- per month towards interim maintenance to the child. 4. In the fitness of things both the appeals (Crl.A. 392 of 2009 and Crl.Appeal 424 of 2009) will have to be heard and disposed of expeditiously. This Revision is accordingly disposed of directing the Crl.R.P. No. 3353 of 2009 -:3:- Addl. Sessions Court, Fast Track, Mavelikkara to dispose of both the aforementioned appeals expeditiously. Till the disposal of the above said appeals, the revision petitioner shall either pays to the respondent or deposit before the trial Court interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) per month to the 2nd respondent minor daughter. Sd/-V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) /true copy/ P.S. to Judge ani.