Smt.Geetha vs State of Kerala,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 22, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1441008

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1441008
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Murali Purushothaman
Decided On: Jul 22, 2022
Case Number: WP(C)/447/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Smt.Geetha

Respondent

State of Kerala,

Excerpt

.....thereafter, the tribunal shall dispose the application within a further period of two months.”2. ext.p1 is the order passed by themaintenance tribunal pursuant to ext.p3. none of the aspects directed to be considered by this court in ext.p3 has been adverted to or considered by the maintenance tribunal in ext.p1. ext.p1 order is therefore set aside being passed in total disregard to the directions of this court in ext.p3 judgment.3. accordingly, there will be a direction to the2nd respondent to re-consider the application of the 3rd respondent for maintenance and pass orders in accordance with the directions in ext.p3 judgment, with notice to the 3rd respondent and the respondents therein. since it is stated that the 3rd respondent is aged 93 years, the maintenance officer appointed under section 18 of the act, if requested by the 3rd respondent shall represent the 3rd respondent in the proceedings before the tribunal. orders as above shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. the writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. sd/- murali purushothaman judge spr appendix petitioner's exhibits:-exhibit p1 true copy of order of maintenance tribunal dated 12.11.2019. exhibit p2 true copy of notice to 1st petitioner from maintenance tribunal dated 02.11.2019. exhibit p3 true copy of judgment in wpc.17450/2015 dated 11.02.2016. respondents exhibits: nil.

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2022 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 447 OF 2020 PETITIONERS: 1 SMT.GEETHA AGED 58 YEARS W/O. UDAYAKUMAR, 'ARAMYA', MANGALATHUVILA, VALIYAKADA, CHIRAYINKIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 304. 2 DEEPA AGED 51 YEARS W/O. UDAYAKUMAR, 'SREYAS', SREEVILASAM NAGAR, 101 V, VADAKKEVILA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691 010. BY ADVS. M.RAJENDRAN NAIR SMT.M.SANTHY RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P. O., PIN - 695 043. 2 SUB COLLECTOR & MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P. O., PIN - 695 043. 3 SMT. MALATHY, W/O. SIVANANDAN, CHARUVILA VEEDU, MELVETTOOR P. O., VETTOOR VILLAGE, PIN - 695 312. R1 & R2 - SMT. K. V RESHMI - GP R3 - SMT.G.VIDYA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The 3rd respondent approached the Maintenance Tribunal under Section 5 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, (for short 'the Act') against the petitioners, and the Tribunal, by order dated 24.04.2015, allowed the petition granting maintenance allowance of

Rs.5,000/- each from the petitioners. The said order

was challenged before this Court and by Ext.P3 judgment, this Court directed the Maintenance Tribunal to re-consider the matter on the following aspects:- “i. whether the senior citizen, the third respondent is having any income to maintain her. ii. whether the petitioners are having any income and liable to pay maintenance to the third respondent. iii. Whether any land has been given to the petitioners by the senior citizen. iv. The petitioners and the third respondent shall appear before the Tribunal on 1.3.2016. v. Thereafter, the Tribunal shall dispose the application within a further period of two months.”

2. Ext.P1 is the order passed by the

Maintenance Tribunal pursuant to Ext.P3. None of the aspects directed to be considered by this Court in Ext.P3 has been adverted to or considered by the Maintenance Tribunal in Ext.P1. Ext.P1 order is therefore set aside being passed in total disregard to the directions of this Court in Ext.P3 judgment.

3. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the

2nd respondent to re-consider the application of the 3rd respondent for maintenance and pass orders in accordance with the directions in Ext.P3 judgment, with notice to the 3rd respondent and the respondents therein. Since it is stated that the 3rd respondent is aged 93 years, the Maintenance Officer appointed under Section 18 of the Act, if requested by the 3rd respondent shall represent the 3rd respondent in the proceedings before the Tribunal. Orders as above shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE SPR APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL DATED 12.11.2019. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE TO 1ST PETITIONER FROM MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL DATED 02.11.2019. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC.17450/2015 DATED 11.02.2016. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Smt.Geetha vs State of Kerala, Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Murali Purushothaman