IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
SHINOY – Appellant
Versus
SUVIJA.K – Respondent
OP(CRL.) NO. 76 OF 2026 | M.C No.242/2022 | CMP No.2/2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to costs imposed in maintenance cases. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court finds imposed costs excessive. (Para 3 , 6) |
| 3. counsel arguments about financial capacity. (Para 4) |
| 4. court's decision to allow request for reasonable payment. (Para 7 , 8) |
K.BABU, J.
--------------------------------------
O.P (Crl) No.76 of 2026 ---------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of February, 2026 JUDGMENT The challenge in this Original Petition is to Ext.P6 order whereby the learned Family Court Judge, Kozhikode ordered the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as costs as a condition for allowing an application seeking to set aside the ex-parte order passed against the petitioner in a Maintenance Case.
2. The respondents filed M.C No.242/2022 before the Family Court seeking maintenance from the petitioner. When the petitioner remained absent, the Court set him ex-parte and passed an award against him. He filed an application to set aside the ex- parte order under the proviso to Section 126 of the Cr.PC. The learned Family Court Judge allowed the application on payment of Rs.25,000/- as costs. The petitioner failed to pay costs.
Consequently, the Family Court dismissed the application due to non-compliance of the condition imposed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the costs imposed is highly exorbitant in view of the nature of the proceedings. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner does not have the financial capacity to pay the costs. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents resisted the Original Petition contending that the petitioner has been avoiding payment of maintenance.
6. Having gone through the submissions, I feel that the order imposing costs at the rate of Rs.25,000/- is exorbitant. Therefore, the order imposing costs is set aside. Consequently, Ext.P6 stands set aside.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for allowing the application seeking to set aside the ex-parte order on condition of making reasonable payment towards the arrears of maintenance.
8. The Maintenance Case was filed as early as in 2022. He was set ex-parte as per order dated 17.08.2023 and the learned Family Court Judge allowed M.C No.242/2022. The petitioner filed CMP No.2/2023 seeking to set aside the ex-parte award. Therefore, CMP No.2/2023 stands allowed on condition that the petitioner deposits Rs.50,000/- towards arrears of maintenance on or before 23.02.2026. On failure of the petitioner to deposit the amount as directed, CMP No.2/2023 would stand dismissed.
The Original Petition (Criminal) is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
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.