Honble KESHOTE, J.–Heard learned counsel for the defendant petitioners, perused the revision petition and the order of the learned Additional District Judge No.3, Kota passed on 6.11.2001 in Civil Misc. Application No.95 of 2000. Under this order the application filed by the plaintiff respondent No.1 under Order 33 Rule 1 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred as the Code) was came to be allowed and she is permitted to file the suit as an indigent person.

(2). It is to be noticed that the defendant petitioners have not given out the detailed facts of the suit filed by the plaintiff respondent No.1.

(3). The plaintiff respondent No.1 undisputed is the wife of the defendant petitioner No.1.

(4). The defendant petitioners no.2 and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the plaintiff respondent No.1.

(5). The defendant petitioners no.4 and 5 are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the plaintiff respondent No.1.

(6). From the impugned order, it appears to be a matrimonial dispute between the plaintiff respondent no.1 and the defendant petitioner no.1. The Family Court, Kota, as it transpires from the order of the learned trial Court, has ordered for payment of the mainten

Click Here to Read the rest of this document