Back
C. S. DIAS
Pinchu Chandran – Appellant
Versus
Arya J. – Respondent
ORDER :
The path of execution is not an easy-going highway; it does not provide short-cuts to the destination, observed this Court in Muraleedharan v. Jincy, 2018(4) KHC 639 relying on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Anita Karmokar v. Birendra Chandra Karmokar, AIR 1962 Cal.88.
2. Does the Family Court have the power to strike off the pleadings in a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(for short, ‘Code’) on the failure to pay interim maintenance? is the question that emanates for consideration in this revision petition.
3. The respondents, the wife and child of the revision petitioner, had filed M.C.No.142/2021 before the Family Court, Mavelikara, against the revision petitioner for an order of maintenance. The miscellaneous petition filed by the respondents’ for interim maintenance was allowed by the Family Court, ordering the revision petitioner to pay the respondents’ Rs.10,000/-per month. Subsequently, on the finding that the revision petitioner had failed to pay the interim maintenance, his defence in the proceeding was struck off, and the maintenance application was allowed by confirming the interim order.
4. The revision petitioner has
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to strike off the defence in a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be exercised as a last resort, ....
Striking off the defense in maintenance proceedings should be a last resort, requiring prior opportunity for compliance and consideration of alternative enforcement measures.
Important points:The power to strike off defences can be exercised by the Family court in cases of civil nature handled by it when the wilfull default of the respondent to comply with the direction t....
Maintenance proceeding – Speedy trial/enquiry is fundamental rights of parties – Principle of natural justice shall be followed while adjudicating petition.
The court emphasized the summary nature of the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the objective to provide immediate relief to the applicant.
The right to cross-examine witnesses is fundamental in maintenance proceedings, and its curtailment without just cause is legally impermissible.
Interim maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. requires thorough financial assessment of both parties, with specific affidavits of assets and liabilities being crucial for the determination of ....
The court emphasized the necessity of reasonable compliance with maintenance orders before striking off a defense in family law matters.
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
