Partly allowed

R.Prasad v. Veena Prasad

Kerala HC29 Sept 2021Mat.Appeal/1024/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the order dismissing an application to set aside an ex parte decree in a matrimonial appeal regarding maintenance and marriage expenses for the appellant's daughter, accepting the appellant's undertaking to pay maintenance and court costs.

What did the court decide?

The Matrimonial Appeal is allowed with the payment of Rs. 2,500/- maintenance to the daughter and Rs. 1,000/- court cost to the respondent within ten days.

R.Prasad Vs Veena Prasad — Maintenance and Alimony | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH WEDNESDAY, THE 29^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 7TH ASWINA, 1943 MAT.APPEAL NO. 1024 OF 2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN O.P.No.489/2016 OF FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

APPELLANT/S:

¶8

R.PRASAD, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, VENU BHAVAN, PADIMON P.O., KEEZHVAYPUR MURI, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 587.

¶9

BY ADV SRI.UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR)

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

VEENA PRASAD, S/O.R.PRASAD, NOW RESIDING AT CHAURASIA NURSING HOME QUARTERS, REEVA, MADHYA PRADESH, PIN-486 001, FROM VENU BHAVAN, PADIMON P.O., KEEZHVAYPUR MURI, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 587.

¶12

BY ADV.SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE

¶13

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

MAT.APPEAL No.1024/2019 2

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

. A.Muhamed Mustaque, J

¶17

This appeal was filed challenging an order dismissing the application to set aside the ex parte decree for the reason that the appellant failed to pay the cost of Rs.500/- within the time stipulated by the court to set aside the ex parte decree. The cost was ordered to be paid only Rs.500/-. The appellant could not pay the same within the time. He filed a petition for enlargement of time for payment of cost. That was allowed. Still, he could not pay the amount within the time. Therefore, the application was dismissed accordingly and the original petition was decreed ex parte. Therefore, the appellant filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree mainly on the ground that he was undergoing psychiatric treatment in Pariyaram Medical College, Kannur. He was working as a security staff. According to him, after selling his property, he paid fees for his daughter to get admission in B.Sc. Nursing course.

¶18

MAT.APPEAL No.1024/2019 3

¶19

The matter is arising from the claim made by the

¶20

appellant's daughter for maintenance and marriage expenses.

¶21

Taking note of the overall circumstances in the matter, we are of the view that the impugned order has to be set aside. The appellant has also undertaken before this Court that he will pay the maintenance of Rs.2,500/- to his daughter till the proceedings are concluded. Based on that undertaking and also payment of the cost of Rs.1,000/- to the respondent through his counsel appearing before this Court within a period of ten days from today, the Mat. Appeal is allowed.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE

¶26

R.Prasad v. Veena Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Prasad v. Veena Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Don Paul Vs Tisa Don @ Tisa Palackal Kuriakose

Abhilash a. Vs Samantha Sathyan

Rahmath Vs Iqbal

V.G.Rajesh, Vs Megha

Mohammed Nazir Abdul Aziz Vs Kadheeja Kalladi Puthanpurayil

Rasha Vs Ajmal