Petitioner, husband, filed Cr.P.C. 482 challenging Sessions Court order enhancing wife's maintenance, contending it was a final order. Court held order was revisable under 397 Cr.P.C., making 482 petition unmaintainable for the petitioner.
Petition dismissed without prejudice to rights of revision petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2007 / 15TH ASHADHA 1929
Crl.MC.No. 3495 of 2003()
CRRP.3/2002 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, NILAMBUR
PETITIONER: 1ST RESPONDENT
PALEMPADIYAN HASSAN S/O. MUHAMMED, KALLAMOOLA CHOKKAD P.O., KALIKAVU VIA.
BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MUHAMMAD FAZIL
SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE
RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS
BY ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
Crl. M.C. No. 3495 OF 2003 ````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 6th day of July, 2007
O R D E R
This is a petition filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. by the husband of the first respondent herein challenging the revisional order dated 31.10.2002 passed by the Sessions Court, Manjeri, enhancing the quantum of reasonable and fair provision for maintenance from Rs.42,000/- to Rs.90,000/-. The enhancement was given by the Sessions Court at the instance of the first respondent wife. When this petition came up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent raised a preliminary objection that this petition filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable since the order passed by the Sessions Court is revisable. I see force in the said submission. The bar under section 397(3) Cr.P.C. is only against the first respondent again approaching the revisional court and it does not apply to the petitioner who was the respondent in the revision filed by the first respondent before the court below. Moreover, the order passed by the Sessions Court amounts to a final order passed in the M.C. and at the instance of the petitioner there is no
Crl.M.C.No.3495/03
: 2 :
bar of revision. Since the order is revisable, this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be maintained. This petition is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the revision petitioner to seek appropriate remedies if so advised.
(V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE)
aks
Crl.M.C.No.3495/03
: 3 :
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
Crl. M.C. No. 3495 OF 2003
O R D E R
6th day of July, 2007
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging a revisable order passed by the Sessions Court in a civil maintenance matter is maintainable.
Whether the bar under section 397(3) Cr.P.C. applies to a respondent who was a party to the revision filed by the other party before the lower court.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Palempadiyan Hassan
Thachangodan Remmath
State of Kerala
V. Ramkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
