Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY,THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2013 8TH SRAVANA, 1935 OP(Crl.).No. 2619 of 2013 (Q) ----------------------------------------- [FROM M.C. NO.6/2009 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM] ...................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------- M.V.THOMAS, AGED 6 YEARS, S/O VARKEY, MANIKKANAMPAMBIL, VYLOPPILLY LANE, AZAD ROAD, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM”
017. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMACHANDRAN. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: ---------------------------------------- SHALLY THOMAS, AGED 5 YEARS, W/O M.V THOMAS, CHAMBARATHI HOUSE, AZAD ROAD, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM”
017. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN. THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Prv. O.P.(CRL.).NO.2619/2013-Q: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COY OF BANK STATEMENT DATED 27 01.2009 REGARDING F.D.'S. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16 03.2010 IN CRL.M.P.NO.3911/2008 IN M.C.NO.6/2009 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 26 03.2011 IN CRL.A.NO.218/2010 OF THE DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF DEPOSITION OF PW1 DATED 11 05.2012 IN O.P.2033/2009 OF THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF DEPOSITION OF RW2 DATED 06 03.2013 IN O.P.2033/2009 OF THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 10 08.2012 IN M.C.NO.6/2009 OF THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 17 07.2013. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. V.K.MOHANAN, J.
------------------------------------------ O.P.(Crl.).No.2619 of 2013 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of July, 2013 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner, who is the respondent in M.C.No.6 of 2009 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam is that, in spite of the fact that the claimant, who is the respondent herein withdrawn an amount of Rupees Thirty lakhs deposited in the name of the respondent/wife, the learned Magistrate directed him to pay monthly maintenance @ `10,000/-. Therefore, he preferred the above Original Petition (Crl.) praying inter alia to call for the records leading to Exts.P2 and P3 and to set aside the same in view of Exts.P4 and P5.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, it appears to me, that M.C.No.6 of 2009 is still pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam even though the same is filed during the year 2009. The present challenge is against the interim order passed by the court below against the petitioner directed to O.P.(Crl.).No.2619 of 2013 :-2-: pay interim maintenance @ `10,000/-. The petitioner has also got a grievance that, though Ext.P6 is preferred before the court below, the same is not considered so far, which is a petition filed with a prayer to revoke the order dated 16/3/2010.
4. In the light of the fact that, both these M.C.No.6 of 2009 and Ext.P6 are pending before the court below, I am of the view that this Court need not retain the Original Petition (Crl.) on the file of this Court, but the same can be disposed directing the court below to dispose M.C.No.6 of 2009 as well as Ext.P6 within a reasonable time. In the result, this O.P.(Crl.) is disposed of directing the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam to take up M.C.No.6 of 2009 and to dispose the same, within three months from the date of producing a copy of this judgment by the petitioner before the court below, after hearing both the petitioner as well as the respondent and considering the evidence, if any, in accordance with the procedure and law. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE skj