IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RPFC.No. 35 of 2009()
1. SAKKEER
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MOHAMMED
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SAJU.S.A
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :28/01/2009
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
R.P.F.C.No. 35 of 2009
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 28th day of January, 2009
O R D E R
The petitioners had suffered an ex parte order directing
them to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- each to their
father, the claimant, who is the respondent herein. The
petitioners filed application to set aside the ex parte order. That
application was a belated one. The same was filed along with an
application for condonation of delay of two months.
2. The learned Judge of the Family Court by the impugned
order indulgently granted the prayer to set aside the ex parte
order on condition that the entire amount due under the
impugned order was paid by 1.1.2009. The amount has been
deposited. The ex parte order now stands set aside.
3. It is submitted at the Bar that the claimant/father has
filed an application to withdraw the amount in deposit. It is at
this juncture that the petitioners have come before this Court to
challenge the impugned order under which the ex parte order was
R.P.F.C.No. 35 of 2009
2
set aside subject to conditions. The petitioners claim to be aggrieved
by the condition imposed.
4. I have rendered my anxious consideration to the contentions
raised. Basically it appears that the question is one of quantum and
whether the claimant/father is unable to maintain himself. I am not
persuaded to agree that the impugned order suffers from any such vice
as to justify or warrant the invocation of the revisional jurisdiction of
superintendence and correction. Needless to say, when the learned
Judge of the Family Court disposes of the matter afresh, the learned
Judge must make appropriate observation regarding the adjustment/
application of the amount that has already been deposited in pursuance
of the impugned order. The same shall now be released to the
claimant/father forthwith.
5. With the above observations this R.P.F.C. is dismissed.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm