Point of Law : Family Courts are specifically directed that, execution proceedings shall be kept pending only in cases where this Court specifically granted order of stay and in such cases also, order of stay will be in operation only in compliance of interim direction to make deposit.

JUDGMENT :

This Original Petition (criminal) has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and the prayer herein is to direct the Family Court, Ernakulam to take up MP No.8/2019 in MC No.99/2015 and dispose of the same at the earliest.

2. Heard.

3. At the time of admission, this Court called for a report from the learned Family Court Judge, Ernakulam. As per letter dated 31.03.2022, the Family Court Judge reported as under :

“In obedience to the OM referred to above, I may humbly submit that MP 8/2019 filed by the petitioner in MC 99/2015 for realization of the quantum of maintenance awarded in the MC was posted for 30/03/2022. For a long time it has been submitted from the side of the respondent that they preferred a Revision Petition (RP(FC) No.17108/2019) before the Hon’ble High Court challenging the order in MC 99/2015. But so far no details pertaining to such a revision petition has been furnished to this court by the respondent despite having afforded repeated opportunities, nor any order of stay of the Hon’ble High Court is also produced in this regard.

On 30/03/2022, MP 8/2019 is adjourned to 22/04/2022 with a positive direction to the respondent to file affidavit furnishing details of revision petition, if any, preferred before the Hon’ble High Court. However, in view of the receipt of the official memorandum from the Hon’ble High Court the matter is suo moto advanced with notice to both parties and pre-poned to 04/04/2022 for initiating coercive steps against the respondent. A total sum of Rs.5,51,430/-is claimed in MP 8/2019 and I humbly assured that all possible measures will be taken for realization of the arrears from the respondent without any delay”.

But the report does not show the further steps on 04.04.2022.

4. Before considering the prayer, it is essential to address the practice of stalling execution proceedings for recovery of maintenance allowance by making submission before the Family Courts that revision petition (RP(FC)) has been pending before this Court. It is noticed that the persons, who are aggrieved by the orders of maintenance passed by the Family Courts, sometimes would file revision petitions (RP(FC)) within time and sometimes with petition to condone the delay in filing the same. In certain instances, though revision petitions have been filed in time, when the same were returned for curing defect, the same will be filed back with petition to condone the re-presentation delay.

Those matters some times will be kept unmoved before the Bench. In certain cases, the same will be kept pending awaiting return of notice. But the revision petitioners even did not show interest to pay process fee and steps to get the notice issued in the delay petition. Similarly, even after moving the revision petition before the Bench, when notice was ordered, the above said practice will be followed. Thereafter, usually submissions will be made before the Family Courts stating that, revision petitions (RP(FC)) have been pending. So the execution needs to be deferred. It is noticed further that in some cases, eventhough this Court passed interim orders to make deposit, without complying the said interim direction, the revision petitioners would adjourn the execution petitions before the Family Courts on the submission that revision petitions have been pending. It is worthwhile to note that the Family Courts generally would not go with the execution of the orders, in cases in which pendency of revision petition without an order of stay is highlighted. Similar is the position inasmuch as Original Petitions (criminal) [OP (Crl)], challenging interim orders of maintenance are concerned. In fact, the Family Courts should not stall or defer execution proceedings, if the execution is not stayed by this Court by specific order. This tactics, in fact, created a lot of hazards to the persons at the receiving end, i.e., the claimants, who are trailing to survive for want of money for their absolute necessity like food,