IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 15TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4763 of 2009(P) ------------------------- CMC.42/2008 of J.M.F.C.-I, CHENGANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- DHANYA SAM, D/O.FR.K.A.MATHEW, ARIYATTU HOUSE,THIRUVANVANDOOR P.O. CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.KURUVILLA JACOB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SAM ABRAHAM, S/O.ITTIYAVIRAH, KOCHAETHU HOUSE, AYTHALA P.O. RANNI, NOW RESIDING AT F-7/6 LIC QUARTERS, LIC COLONY, BORIVILI (W), MUBAI-103. 2. ITTIYAVIRAH, KOCHETHU HOUSE, AYTHALA P.O RANNI. R1 BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM SAMSON SMT.LOVELY SAMSON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 4763/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS.: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF M.C.NO.42/2008 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, CHENGANNUR UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF CMP NO.95/2009 IN M.C.NO.42/2008 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, CHENGANNUR SEEKING INTERIM MAINTENANCE FROM 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF 1ST RESPONDENT'S OBJECTION FILED ON 19.1.09 IN ANSWER TO EXT.P2 APPLICATION. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF CMP NO.408/2009 IN M.C.NO.42/2008 FILED BY PETTIONER BEFORE THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, CHENGANNUR SEEKING DIRECTION TO PRODUCE THE SALARY CERTIFICATE AND INCOME TAX RETURNS OF 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 23.1.09 IN CMP NO.95/09 IN M.C.NO.42/2008 OF THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, CHENGANNUR. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF 1ST RESPONDENT'S INCOME TAX RETURN VERIFICATION FORM SUBMITTED FOR THE YEAR 2009-2010 AND PRODUCED IN M.C.42/2008 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHENGANNUR. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 3.5.10 OF THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, MDO-III AT MUMBAI COMMUNICATED TO PETITIONER. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Civil) No.4763 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of February, 2011 Judgment In this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner sought a declaration that she and her two children are entitled to get monthly interim maintenance from the first respondent, the husband of the petitioner, from the date of Ext.P1 complaint. The other relief sought for is to issue a writ of mandamus or any other direction to the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chengannoor to dispose of Ext.P4 application as expeditiously as possible so as to fix the monthly maintenance payable to the petitioner and her two children. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the first respondent was directed to produce the salary certificate, he did not produce the same and that was why the application was filed directing his employer to produce the salary certificate or particulars regarding the salary he was drawing. Though the 1st respondent was directed to produce his income tax returns, that was also not produced earlier. 3. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner WPC 4763/09 2 has produced a copy of the Income Tax Return Verification Form (Ext.P6) which shows that after deduction his total income comes to Rs.405183 for the period 2009-2010. Learned counsel for the first respondent submits that he did not get opportunity to verify the correctness of the same. Since he is the officer to submit the returns, he can produce the attested copy available with him. He can produce copy of the return for the period 2010-2011 also. It is for him to produce copies of the returns, if there is any difference in the particulars furnished in Ext.P6. 4. The other request of the petitioner was to direct the employer to produce the salary certificate. It was stated that Ext.P4 application was filed before the learned Magistrate. If the learned Magistrate is not satisfied with the particulars furnished by the 1st respondent in Ext.P6, it is open to the Magistrate to issue summons to the employer of the first respondent to cause production of the salary particulars. 5. The other grievance voiced by the petitioner is that the learned Magistrate has ordered maintenance only from February, 2009 onwards and not from the date of the petition. The learned counsel submits that the normal rule is that the maintenance WPC 4763/09 3 should be awarded from the date of the petition unless there are specific reasons to reject the same. Here the learned Magistrate has awarded only interim maintenance. Interim maintenance is awarded to see that the woman and children are not put to destitution. When the matter is finally heard, the learned Magistrate may have to consider the right of the petitioner to get maintenance from the date of the petition. That is to be ordered at the final stage. 6. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a direction may be issued to dispose of the claim for maintenance expeditiously. Regarding non-payment of the interim maintenance already awarded by the learned Magistrate; the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the first respondent is not paying the amount on time. If the first respondent does not comply with the order passed by the learned Magistrate, certainly the petitioner can request the Magistrate to execute the same as provided under Section 20(6) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (for short 'the D.V.Act'). Learned counsel for the 1st respondent denied the allegation made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He WPC 4763/09 4 submits that there was due compliance of the order passed by the learned Magistrate. Anyway, it is for the learned Magistrate to take action, if any, under Section 20(6) of the D.V.Act, if proper application is moved for that purpose. Maintenance is claimed by the wife for herself and for her two children who are studying. The 1st respondent is stated to be drawing huge amount as salary. The expenses that may be required for the school going children also may have to be considered. The learned Magistrate will see that the claim for maintenance is enquired into and disposed of at the earliest, at least within three months from the date of receipt of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as indicated above. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd WPC 4763/09 5