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

2012 Supreme(Ker) 650

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.T. SANKARAN & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
C.P. Reshma
Versus
P.K. Jayan
O.P. (FC) No. 2013 of 2012
Decided on : 22-08-2012

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:E.N. Vishnu Namboodiri, N.N. Elayath, S.P. Suresh Kumar, Advocates.
For the Respondent: M.P. Sreekrishnan, (Amicus Curiae).

Headnote:A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 407, 125(3) - Section 7(2) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 -High court has the authority to pass the case from family court to another courts under CrPC -Fresh application is not allowed by the petitioner for arrears of maintenance.

JUDGMENT :-

M.L. Joseph Francis, J.

1. This Original Petition (Family Court) is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs :

(i) Direct the Family Court, Kannur to transfer the necessary records of M.C. No. 425/2005 and M.C. No. 458/2011 to Family Court, Kasaragod or any other Court at Kanhangad for realizing the amount standing due from the respondent towards the petitioner and her children.

(ii) Allow the petitioner for her behalf and on behalf of her two minor children to realize the amount now due and may become due in future by initiating necessary legal proceeding before the Family Court, Kasaragod or any other Court at Kanhangad.

2. The facts of the case are briefly as follows: The petitioner herein is the first petitioner in M.C. No. 425 of 2005 on the file of the Family Court, Kannur. The petitioners 2 and 3 in the M.C. are the children born in the wedlock between the petitioner and the respondent. Their marriage took place on 25-03-2002. It is alleged that after the marriage the respondent treated the petitioner with cruelty for a period of five years and thereafter, deserted her even without paying maintenance. Therefore, she was compelled to file M.C. No. 425 of 2005 before the Family Court, Kannur for maintenance to her and her children from the respondent, who was working in Army. On 22-03-2007, the Family Court allowed the M.C. ex parte by providing Rs.800/- per month to the petitioner and Rs.600/-each per month to the children. C.M.P. No. 492 of 2011 filed under Section 125(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Cr.P.C.) is pending before the Family Court, Kannur to realize the amount due from the respondent for the period from 26-07-2010 to 25.7.2011, as per the order in M.C.No.425 of 2005. In the year 2011, the petitioner and her minor children filed M.C.No.458 of 2011 before the Family Court, Kannur under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. The matter was settled before the Principal Counselor and as per the settlement, the Family Court allowed the M.C. and directed the respondent to provide maintenance to the petitioner and her children at the rate of Rs.1,000/- each per month since December, 2011. The maintenance amount from 25-07-2011 is due from the respondent. During the pendency of M.C. Nos. 425 of 2005 and 458 of 2011, the petitioner and her minor children were living at Paralam Village of Kozhummal Desom, Taliparamba Taluk, Kannur District. Later, their residence was shifted to Kanhangad, Kasaragod District'. The petitioner's children are studying at Kanhangad. Petitioner's aged mother and grandmother, who are laid up due to various ailments are also residing with the petitioner under the care and protection of the petitioner. Petitioner is also suffering from rheumatic complaints. She is not in a position to travel from Kasaragod to Kannur, on every posting date of the case. Her children are minors and there is nobody to look after them in the house in her absence since her mother and grandmother are laid up. Moreover, the petitioner needs travelling expenses for her travel from Kasaragod to Kannur. Considerable portion of the maintenance amount is to be spent towards advocate fee and travelling expenses if execution of orders in M.C. Nos. 425 of 2005 and 458 of 2011 is carried out in Kannur District. At the Kanhangad Court premises there is sitting of Family Court, Kasaragod twice in a month and the said Court is very near to the petitioner's residence. One of her close relatives is practising at Kasaragod Bar. If further execution proceedings are allowed to be carried out under the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Kasaragod, it would be convenient to the petitioner.

3. Though notice was served on the respondent, there was no appearance for the respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Adv. Sri. M.P. Sreekrishnan, who assisted this Court as amicus curiae.

4. During the pendency of this proceedings, the petitioner filed I.A.No.10813








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