Neelavva vs Shekappa

H. Billappa, J.—The petitioner has filed this revision petition challenging the order dated 9.11.2011 passed by the Family Court, Dharwad, in Crl.Misc. No. 248/2011.

By the impugned order, the Family Court, Dharwad, has rejected the petition filed by the petitioner for maintenance u/s 125 of Cr.P.C.

Aggrieved by that, the petitioner has filed this revision petition.

Briefly stated, the facts are;

The petitioner is the mother of the respondent. She is aged about 80 years. She is not doing any work. She is unable to maintain herself. The respondent is the son of the petitioner. It is stated, the respondent earns Rs. 10,00,000/- per annum by doing business and from agriculture. He has failed to maintain the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has prayed for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- per month.

The respondent has resisted the petition contending that he is not getting any income and he is leading his life by doing coolie work. It is only to harass him the petitioner has filed the petition.

In the course of evidence, the petitioner has been examined as PW. 1 partly. Thereafter, she has not turned up to lead further evidence or for cross-examination. Therefore, the Family Court has rejected the petition. Aggrieved by that, the petitioner has filed this revision petition.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is the mother of the respondent and she is now aged about 82 years and she is unable to maintain herself. The Family Court has dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner has not tendered full evidence. Therefore, the matter requires reconsideration.

There is no representation on behalf of the respondent though served.

The petitioner is the mother of the respondent. She is now aged 82 years. She is without means. The interim maintenance is ordered, but it is not paid. Unfortunately, the petitioner has not led full evidence. Therefore, the Family Court has rejected the petition. It is in the interest of justice and in the circumstances of the case, an opportunity needs to be given to the petitioner to lead further evidence.

Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed and the order dated 9.11.2011 passed by the Family Court, Dharwad, in Crl.Misc. No. 248/2011 is hereby set-aside. The/matter is remitted to the Family Court, Dharwad, with a direction to reconsider the same, in accordance with law, by giving opportunity to the petitioner and the respondent to lead their evidence. Before proceeding further, the Family Court shall issue fresh notice to the respondent.