IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2009 / 8TH ASHADHA 1931 RPFC.No. 128 of 2009() ---------------------- AGAINST ORDER IN CMP NO.1297/2008 IN MC NO.40/2007 OF FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD. REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------- MUSTHAFA, 30 YEARS, S/O.KUNGHIMUHAMMED, KATTEERITHMODI VEEDU, KULUKKALLUR AMSOM, MULAYAMKAVU DESOM, KULUKKLLUE (VIA), OTTAPPALAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- JAMEELA, AGED 21 YEARS, D/O.MUHAMMED, PATTATHODIYIL HOUSE, VIA PATTAMBI, NEDUNGOTTUR DESOM AND P.O.,RAYIRANELLUR AMSOM, OTTAPPALAM TALUK. ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- R.P.(FC) No.128 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June, 2009. ORDER This revision is in challenge of dismissal of C.M.P.No.1297 of 2008 as per which petitioner/husband requested for an opportunity to contest M.C.No.40 of 2007 which was decided exparte. Respondent filed M.C.No.40 of 2007 seeking maintenance from the petitioner before the Family Court, Palakkad. It would appear that the application was posted on 3.6.2008 and then adjourned by notification to 10.6.2008. Later, the application was posted in Pattambi Camp Court on 10.6.2008. On that day petitioner was not present. There was no representation for him. Evidence of respondent was recorded and order was passed directing petitioner to pay maintenance to the respondent at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month from the date of application (23.1.2007). Petitioner filed C.M.P.No.1297 of 2008 to set aside the exparte order. That petition was opposed by respondent. Petitioner claimed that himself and counsel had been to the Family Court, Palakkad on 10.6.2008 without knowing that the petition was being taken at the Camp Court at Pattambi. Court below dismissed the petition. Learned counsel requests that petitioner may be granted an opportunity to contest the case. According to the learned counsel, petitioner has valid and serious contentions to be raised in respect of the claim of respondent for separate residence and maintenance. Learned counsel for respondent submitted that there is no merit in the application to reopen the case. RP(FC) No.128/2009 2 2. I am not inclined to think that there was willful default or laches on the part of petitioner in contesting M.C.No.40 of 2007. I am therefore inclined to give an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the case. At the same time respondent who is admittedly the wife of the petitioner cannot be asked to starve until M.C.No.40 of 2007 is finally disposed of by the court below after a contest. It will take time for disposal of M.C.No.40 of 2007. Until then, petitioner has to pay interim maintenance to respondent which, considering the facts and circumstances of the case is fixed as Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) per month. Petitioner has also to deposit for payment to respondent 50% of the arrears at the said rate due as on 30.6.2009, less the sum of Rs.15,000/- already in deposit. Resultantly, this revision is allowed and the order under challenge is set aside on condition that petitioner deposited in the trial court for payment to respondent 50% of the arrears at the rate of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) due as on 30.6.2009 less the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) already deposited by him, within one month from this day. On such deposit, this revision will stand allowed. It is also directed that petitioner should pay to the respondent interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees RP(FC) No.128/2009 3 one thousand only) per month from 1.7.2009 till the disposal of M.C.No.40 of 2007. Parties shall appear in the court below on 3.8.2009. The sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) already in deposit can be withdrawn by the respondent and adjusted towards the arrears directed to be deposited hereby. Crl.M.A.No.3480 of 2009 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks