Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
BETSY KANYAKONIL CHANDY – Appellant
Versus
TIJU MUZHANGODIYIL JOHN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. family court and maintenance application (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 12) |
| 2. arguments regarding default and representation (Para 7 , 14 , 17) |
| 3. judicial observations and social justice (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 15) |
| 4. final decision and order restoration (Para 18) |
ORDER
The revision petitioners are the wife and children of the respondent. The revision petitioners filed a petition for maintenance for the children from the respondent under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure . 2. The marriage between petitioner No.1 and the respondent was solemnized on 27.05.2002 as per the Christian Religious Rites and Customs. Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 were born in her wedlock with the respondent. Petitioner No.1 alleged that the respondent continuously tortured her mentally and physically. She further alleged that the respondent refused to pay maintenance to her children. Petitioner No.1 is working as Staff Nurse at Aramco hospital.
3. Petitioner No. 1 filed a maintenance case before the Family Court, Pathanamthitta, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for and on behalf of petitioner Nos. 2 to 4, who are minors, as M.C. No. 202/2016. The Family Court, by order dated 09.02.2022, dismissed the a
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
