Ramachandran Nair vs Vanaja on 12 October, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP (FC).No. 282 of 2010(R)


1. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. VANAJA, AGED 48 YEARS
                       ...       Respondent

2. RINTU, AGED 18 YEARS

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.PRIYADARSAN THAMPI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS

 Dated :12/10/2010

 O R D E R
            R.BASANT & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
                      ***********************
                    O.P(F.C) No.282 of 2010
                  *****************************
             Dated this the 12th day of October, 2010

                           JUDGMENT

BASANT, J.

The petitioner has suffered an order under Section 125

Cr.P.C to pay maintenance to the respondents. The amount due

has not been paid obliging the claimants to approach the Family

Court for execution. Steps in execution are in progress. The

amount due has not been paid in full so far. The petitioner

prayed for instalment facility. The court below was not pleased

to grant the same. The said request was rejected by the

impugned order.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner is a person, aged above 60 years. If instalment

facility is not granted, the petitioner will be obliged to go to

prison in execution of the warrant of arrest issued against him.

In the circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner

prays that leniency may be shown and instalment facility may be

offered to the petitioner.

3. We are unable to accept the request. In a claim for

maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C, we find no merit in the

prayer for instalment facility for payment of the amount due. The

O.P(F.C) No.282 of 2010 2

petitioner must discharge the liability expeditiously. No

instalment facility deserves to be granted. The rejection of the

prayer for instalment facility is thus found to be absolutely

justified.

4. However, we observe that if the petitioner deposits a

substantial portion of the amount in arrears and undertakes to

pay the balance amount within a short stipulated period of time,

the court below shall be at liberty to consider the same and pass

appropriate orders.

5. With the above observations, this O.P is dismissed.

6. Hand over a copy of this judgment to the learned

counsel for the petitioner immediately.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

(M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE)

rtr/