HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Kauser Edappagath, J
LIJO JOSE
– Appellant
Versus
TWINKLE MARIA JOSE – Respondent
JUDGMENT
This criminal revision petition has been filed challenging the judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Ernakulam in Crl.Appeal No.395 of 2019.
2. The 1st respondent in this revision petition is the wife of the 1st revision petitioner. The 2nd and 3rd revision petitioners are the parents of the 1st revision petitioner. The 1st respondent filed a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act) against the revision petitioners claiming various reliefs. The 1st petitioner remained ex parte. The learned Magistrate passed an ex parte order against the 1st petitioner alone. The said order was challenged in appeal before the appellate court in Crl.Appeal No.395 of 2019. The appellate court set aside the ex parte order on condition that the revision petitioners shall deposit arrears of maintenance amount due to the tune of Rs.5,40,000/- within a period of one month. The said order is under challenge in this revision petition.
3. I have heard Sri. K. Jose Kuriakose, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Salil Narayanan, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent.
4. As per the order of this Court dated 30.5.2
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.