SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

K.HARILAL
Benny Varghese – Appellant
Versus
Siby P. Kuruvilla – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Saigi Jacob Palatty, Advocate.
For the Respondent:T.K. Sanjeev, Advocate.

ORDER

K. Harilal, J.—The Revision Petitioner herein in the respondent in MP No. 51 of 2012 in MC No. 345 of 2006 on the files of the Family Court, Muvattupuzha. He is the husband of the 1st respondent and the respondent 2 and 3 are the minor children aged 10 years and 7 years respectively, born in that wedlock. The respondents herein filed MC No. 345 of 2006 before the Family Court, Ernakulam seeking maintenance allowance from the Revision Petitioner herein. The above MC was allowed by an order dated 16.10.2009 directing the Revision Petitioners to pay maintenance allowance @ 7,750 per month to the respondents 1 to 3 from 2.12.2006, the date of petition.

2. To enforce the said order, on 29.12.2012 the Family Court issued warrant under Section 421 (b) Cr.P.C, since the balance due from the Revision Petitioner as on that date was

Rs. 1,05,750. Tate Revision Petitioner challenged the above order before this Court by filing R.P. (FC) No. 32 of 20l3. This Court, as per order dated 29.1.2013, set aside the order dated 29.12.2012 and directed the Family Court to hear both parties and to pass an order afresh in accordance with law.

3. The impugned order was passed in M.P. No. 51 of 2012, a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top