SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52120

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
JOY.C – Appellant
Versus
JASEELA – Respondent
RPFC NO. 427 OF 2018



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN
For the Respondents: SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN

A petitioner may set aside an ex parte maintenance order conditioned upon the deposit of arrears.

Headnote:This revision petition challenges the dismissal of the petition to set aside an ex parte order in M.C. No.313/2014, wherein maintenance was ordered against the petitioner. The petitioner was ex parte and the maintenance amounts were fixed for the respondents. The court's primary determination involved setting aside the ex parte order conditional upon the deposit of maintenance arrears. Key issues include whether the ex parte order should stand. The court reasoned that the petitioner must pay a substantial amount of the arrears to proceed further. The revision petition is disposed of with instructions for the petitioner to deposit ₹5,00,000 within one month.

Table of Content
1. challenge to ex parte order regarding maintenance. (Para 1 , 2)
2. hearing both sides. (Para 3)
3. maintenance arrears detail. (Para 4)
4. conditions for setting aside ex parte order. (Para 5)

O R D E R

This revision petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Family Court, Palakkad, dismissing the petition to set aside the ex parte order in M.C. No.313/2014.

2. The petitioner is the husband of the first respondent and father of respondents 2 and 3. The respondents have filed M.C. No.313/2014 against the petitioner before the Family Court claiming maintenance. The petitioner was set ex parte and an ex parte order was passed. The Family Court, after trial, granted monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- to the first respondent and Rs.2,000/- each to respondents 2 and 3 with effect from 22.12.2014. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P. No.1002/2016 to set aside the said ex parte order. The Family Court as per the impugned order allowed the petition on condition that the petitioner shall deposit the entire arrears of maintenance as on the date of passing the said order. It is challenging the said order that this revision petition has been filed.

3. I have heard Sri.Jacob Sebastian, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri.Dinesh Mathew J.Muricken, the learned counsel for the respondents.

4. The total maintenance arrears as of this month would come to Rs.9,24,000/-, out of which the petitioner has already paid Rs.1,07,334/-, and the balance would come to Rs.8,16,666/-.

5. Having heard both sides, this revision petition is disposed of, setting aside the ex parte order in M.C. No.313/2014 on condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards the maintenance arrears due within a period of one month from today. On such deposit, the ex parte order in M.C. No.313/2014 would stand set aside and the Family Court shall dispose of the maintenance case in accordance with law after giving both sides an opportunity to be heard. If the petitioner fails to deposit the maintenance arrears as aforementioned, the ex parte order in the maintenance case would stand confirmed.

This revision petition is disposed of as above.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top