AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Abraham Mathew, J.—Petitioners are the respondents in M.C. 155/2013 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Pathanamthitta. By Annexure 2 ex parte order, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate directed payment of Rs.5,000/- as interim maintenance per month to the petitioner in the M.C. The prayer in this Criminal M.C. is to direct the learned Magistrate to consider the objection filed by the petitioners without delay. There is also a prayer to direct the learned Magistrate not to enforce the ex parte order before the objection is disposed of.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Though notice was served on R2, there is no representation for her.
The 1st petitioner is the husband of the 2nd respondent, who is the petitioner in the M.C. in the lower Court. The 2nd petitioner is his brother. In the order passed by the learned Magistrate it is not at all mentioned who should pay the maintenance. It is unfortunate that such a vague order has been passed. It is not known how the 2nd petitioner may be directed to pay maintenance to his sister- in-law. The petitioner filed objection long back. The request of the petitioners is that the learned Magistrate may be directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as reasonable.
In the result, this Criminal M.C. is allowed. The learned Magistrate is directed to consider Annexure 3 objection and take a decision without delay.