High Court Kerala High Court

Mathol Abdul Azeez vs Panginikkadan Safiya on 8 June, 2007

Kerala High Court
Mathol Abdul Azeez vs Panginikkadan Safiya on 8 June, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 17674 of 2007(S)


1. MATHOL ABDUL AZEEZ,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. PANGINIKKADAN SAFIYA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SAMJAS 13 YEARS, S/O.SAFIYA (MINOR),

3. SAFNA, 9 YEARS, D/O.SAFIA (MINOR),

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :08/06/2007

 O R D E R
           KURIAN JOSEPH &  T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,  JJ.

                      ----------------------------------------------

                            W.P.(C) No.17674  of 2007

                      ----------------------------------------------

                                Dated 8th June,  2007.

                                     J U D G M E N T

Kurian Joseph, J.

Petitioner is the respondent in M.C.509/2006 on the file of

the Family Court, Malappuram. The respondents are the petitioners in

the said case. In the nature of the view we propose to take in this

case, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents, since the

order in our view would otherwise safeguard their interests, and will

not cause any prejudice to them. Ext.P1 order was passed by the

Family Court granting maintenance to the respondents at the rate of

Rs.2,000/-, Rs.1,500/- and Rs.1,000/- respectively from the date of the

petition. The petitioner was set ex parte. It is submitted that on

coming to know of the ex parte order, he had filed Exts.P2 and P3

petitions before the Family Court for condonation of delay as well as

for setting aside the ex parte order. It is further submitted that during

the pendency of those petitions, coercive steps are taken for

implementing Ext.P1. Therefore, it is submitted that there may be a

direction to the Family Court to dispose of Exts.P2 and P3 applications,

before proceeding with the coercive steps for implementation of

Ext.P1.

2. After having heard the counsel for the petitioner, we

are of the view that since the application for setting aside the ex parte

WP(C) NO.17674/07 2

order is pending before the Family Court, it is only in the interests of

justice that the said application is duly considered and disposed of

before initiating coercive steps for the implementation of the order,

which is sought to be set aside, by putting the petitioner on terms.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of as follows :-

The petitioner will deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/-

towards interim maintenance within two weeks from today. On such

deposit, the Family Court shall take up for consideration, Exts.P2 and

P3 applications and dispose of the same in accordance with law. We

make it clear that the amount thus deposited shall be permitted to be

withdrawn by the respondents towards maintenance and the same

shall be duly adjusted towards the amount due to them. Needless to

say that the coercive steps initiated against the petitioner shall be

deferred till such time.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.

tgs

KURIAN JOSEPH &

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ

———————————————-

L.A.A. NO. OF 2004

———————————————-

J U D G M E N T

Dated 8th June, 2007.