M.C No.174/2012, wherein the revision petitioner is the respondent, was decided ex-parte by the Family Court, Malappuram on 9.11.2012, directing him to pay maintenance to his wife at the rate of ₹5,000/- and to the child at the rate of ₹3,000/- per month. Pending the proceedings the trial court had ordered interim maintenance. The revision petitioner herein filed C.M.P No.819/2013 and C.M.P No.820/2013 in the trial court. One was to set aside the ex-parte maintenance order, and the other was to condone the delay in filing the other application. On hearing both sides, the trial court allowed the two applications on a condition that 50% of the amount of interim maintenance awarded by the court shall be paid to the wife and child on or before 18.3.2014. The said order was passed on 1.3.2014.
2. Now the respondent in the trial court is before this Court, and his grievance is that he is directed to pay a cost of ₹20,000/- as a condition for having the ex-parte order set R.P(FC) No.107 of 2014 2 aside. Of course, the impugned order is not happily worded. This Court is not happy with the way in which the direction is worded by the trial court. Anyway, I find, on a reading of the impugned order, that what is directed by the trail court is payment of half of the interim maintenance already ordered by the trial court, and the amount comes to ₹20,000/-. It is clarified that the amount need not be considered as costs. With the above observation this revision petition is disposed of.
The learned counsel for the revision petitioner made a request to grant some more time to make payment of the amount in the trial court. In the above circumstances, I am inclined to extend the time for payment, and accordingly the revision petitioner is permitted to make deposit of the amount on or before 7.7.2014, for payment to the respondents.
P.UBAID JUDGE ab