C O M M O N O R D E R

These Civil Revision Petitions are filed challenging the order passed by the Family Court dismissing the applications filed by the petitioner/wife to strike off the defence of the respondent in her petition for restitution of conjugal rights and also application filed for issue of notice to garnishee calling upon him to pay the interim maintenance due to the petitioner.

2. Both the petitions filed by the wife were dismissed by the Court below mainly on the ground that main HMOP filed for restitution of conjugal rights by the wife and for divorce by her husband were ripe for arguments. Hence, the Family Court dismissed both the petitions even without numbering.

3. It is seen from the typed set of papers that the petitioner herein filed HMOP.No.120 of 2016 for restitution of conjugal rights. The respondent herein on his part filed HMOP.No.112 of 2016 for divorce. The petitioner herein filed an application for interim maintenance in HMOP.No.112 of 2016 and the same was allowed by directing the respondent to pay a sum of 4,000/- per month as interim maintenance. The respondent failed to pay the interim maintenance as directed and hence the instant application have been filed by the petitioner/wife seeking to strike off the defence of the respondent in her petition for restitution of conjugal rights. The petitioner also filed an application for issue of notice to garnishee calling upon him to pay interim maintenance payable by the respondent/husband, as he failed to comply with the directions issued by the Family Court to pay interim maintenance to the petitioner/wife. She is entitled to file an application seeking to strike off the defence raised by the husband. Likewise, the petitioner is also entitled to issue notice to garnishee for ensuring payment of maintenance amount. The Family Court ought not have dismissed these applications even without numbering on the ground that the main original petition is ripe for arguments. When respondent failed to comply with direction issued by Court to pay interim maintenance, the Family Court ought to have numbered the petitions and heard the parties on merits. Therefore, the impugned orders in revisions are set aside and both revision petitions are allowed. The Family Court is directed to number the applications and dispose of the same in accordance in accordance with law. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

23.02.2024 Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No ub To The Family Court, Thiruvallur District.

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

ub

23.02.2024