JUDGMENT

The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent in his capacity as the Maintenance Tribunal and Revenue Divisional Officer, while issuing Ext.P2 order has restricted the order only with regard to the grant of maintenance and the request for setting aside a settlement deed executed by the petitioner has been rejected for the reason that I.A.1625/2018 is pending before the Thrissur Vacation Court. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondents 1 and 2 are duty bound to consider the application and pass a positive order either granting the reliefs or rejecting the reliefs and they could not refuse to pass an order on the ground that a civil suit is pending. It is also submitted that the civil suit is for a partition and has nothing to do with the document in question. The Counsel for the respondents 4 to 9 objects the above prayer stating that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal and that even if the document is to be set aside, it is necessary to go into the recitations in the document to consider whether the document itself says that the settlement is on condition of maintenance. It is also submitted that the suit which has been filed by t