J U D G M E N T

Sophy Thomas, J.

The petitioner in OP No.527 of 2018 on the file of Family Court, Pala, filed the above original petition aggrieved by the action of the Family Court in proceeding with the evidence of the respondent/husband, before disposing Ext.P4 petition filed by her for striking out his pleadings, as he failed to pay the interim maintenance ordered by the court.

2. OP No.527 of 2018 was filed by the original petitioner for divorce. The respondent/husband defaulted payment of maintenance ordered by the Family Court @ Rs.15,000/- per month. So, the petitioner/wife filed Ext.P4 application to strike off his defence. Without considering or disposing that application, the Family court granted opportunity to the respondent for adducing evidence, in gross violation of the dictum laid down by the Apex Court in Rajnesh vs. Neha and another ( 2020 (6) KHC 1 ).

3. Considering the nature of relief prayed, notice to the respondent is dispensed with.

4. If failure to pay maintenance is deliberate and willful, and if the husband violates the order of the court to pay the maintenance without any impunity, the Family Court will be justified in striking off his defence even in a pro