IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2008 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1929 MFA.No. 1036 of 1999(A) ---------------------------------- OP.249/1997 of FAMILY COURT,THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT: IST RESPONDENT ------------------ M.G.RAVEENDRAN, S/O. MADAMBISSERY GOPALAN, SUBHASH NAGAR ROAD, KANIMANGALAM P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: PETTIIOENR AND RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 ------------------------ 1. M.R.REKHA, D/O. N.A.MALATHI, NOCHIYIL VEEDU, RAPPAL DESOM, PARAPOOKKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. DINESAN, S/O. KRISHNANKUTTY, KOOTTALA HOUSE, KANNAMKULANGARA DESOM, CHIYYARAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 3. JAYANTHI, W/O. KOOTTALA DINESAN, KANNAMKULANGARA DESOM, CHIYYARAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR - R1 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP. NO.1036/1999 ORDER ON CMP. NO.2553/2001 IN MFA. NO.1036/1999 DISMISSED 06.03.2008 SD/- J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE SD/- K.HEMA, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.1036 OF 1999 ------------------------------------- Dated 6th March, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . This appeal is filed by the first respondent in O.P.No.249 of 1997of the Family Court, Thrissur. First respondent in this appeal filed an application for maintenance from the appellant who is her father. After consideration of the evidence, the Family Court awarded Rs.73,000/= with interest towards future and past maintenance. It is submitted that out of Rs.73,000/=, Rs.50,000/= was already paid. First respondent is in Dubai and she is already married. We note that the matter was posted before the adalath on 7.10.2006 and appellant was present in the adalath, but, respondent was absent. Advocate for the respondent was advised to settle the matter. Again the matter was posted before Lok Adalath on 24.8.2007. Then also respondent was absent. Thereafter on 25.1.2008 there was a direction for the parties to be present in court today. Today also appellant was present, but, respondent was absent in spite of the direction to appear in person. Counsel also was absent. In these circumstance, we take the statement of the counsel for the appellant that first respondent is in Dubai and she is married as correct. We are of the view that Rs.50,000/= already MFA.1036/1999 2 given can be treated as sufficient maintenance ordered. No further maintenance is to be paid by the appellant. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE K.HEMA JUDGE tks