In maintenance proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, the welfare of the minor child takes precedence over other considerations.

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure .

2. The petitioners herein are the respondents in a proceeding initiated under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 at the instance of the 2nd respondent, the wife of the 1st petitioner herein. The petitioners entered appearance and filed their objections. However, they did not appear thereafter and contest the proceedings.

3. The learned Magistrate granted protection order and directed the 1st petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per mensem to the 2nd respondent and the minor child and the petitioners were ordered to return the gold ornaments alleged to have been entrusted with him.

4. The said order was challenged before the Court of Sessions, Ernakulam. By a well considered order, the learned Sessions Judge stayed the proceedings on condition that the petitioner deposits one half of the amount of maintenance payable from 13.6.2017 within a period of two months. While passing the said order the learned Sessions Judge has taken note of the fact that it was the respondent, who was maintaining the minor child.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the order passed by the courts below cannot be sustained. He would further contend that the 2nd respondent is gainfully employed and this fact was not taken note of. He also has a case that the 1st petitioner has been paying maintenance at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- to the child pursuant to orders passed by the Family Court.

6. Having considered the submissions advanced, it doesn't appear to me that the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge warrants interference on any count. Furthermore, what has been passed is only an interim order and it has been clarified that the amount ordered is towards maintenance of the child alone. If the 1st petitioner is paying any sum by way of maintenance, he can raise this contention when the appeal is taken for hearing on its merits.

7. However, before parting, I direct the learned Sessions Judge to made an endeavor to dispose of the case on its merits in an expeditious manner.

This petition is disposed off.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE DSV/-

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE M.C. NO. 21/2017 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD DATED 13.6.2017 ANNEXURE II A TRUE COPY OF THE O.P. NO. 245/2017 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED

31.1.2017 ANNEXURE III THE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.

1032/2016 OF KOTTAPPADY POLICE DATED

24.12.2016.

ANNEXURE IV A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN M.C. NO.

21/2017 ON THE FIlE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD DATED 7.6.2018.

ANNEXURE V A TRUE COPY OF THE CRL. APPEAL NO. 250/2018 ON THE FIE OF DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 16.6.2018.

ANNEXURE VI A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM PETITIONER IN M.C. NO. 109/2018 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA DATED 20.8.2018.

ANNEXURE VII A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P. NO.

1790/2018 IN CRL. APPEAL NO. 250/2018 ON THE FILE OF VITH ADDL. SESSIONS COURT DATED

23.11.2018.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL //TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE