1. Applicant – husband of respondent No.2 has filed this Revision Application challenging the Judgment and order dated 25.10.2010 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Junagadh, in Criminal Misc. Application (New) No. 482 of 2010, whereby the learned Judge has partly allowed the said application ordering that the applicant – husband shall pay Rs.1500/- per month to the wife (respondent No.2) and Rs.700/- per month to the minor son – respondent No.3, towards their maintenance. Against the said Judgment and order, the applicant – husband has filed this Revision Application.
2. Heard learned Advocate Ms. Kruti Vora, appearing through Legal Aid, for the applicant, learned APP Mr. Pandya for the respondent No.1 – State and learned Advocate Ms. Vijayalakshmi for the respondent No.2 – wife.
3. Learned Advocate Ms. Vora for the applicant states that the Judgment and order passed by the learned Judge is without affording an opportunity to the applicant. She has contended that due to unavoidable circumstance, the applicant could not remain present before the Family Court and even he could not engage lawyer to defend his case. She has contended that the learned Judge should have passed the order after hearing both the sides, but, without considering the facts of the case and without affording an opportunity to the applicant – husband, the learned Judge has passed an ex-parte order. She, therefore, contended that the matter may be remanded to the Family Court for fresh hearing, after affording opportunity of hearing to both the sides as also to produce documentary evidence.
4. Learned Advocate Ms. Vijayalakshmi for the respondent No.2 has vehemently opposed this application. She has contended that if the matter is remanded to the Family Court for fresh hearing then some compensation may be awarded to the respondent No.2 – wife.
5. In view of above, this Revision Application is allowed. The Judgment and order dated 25.10.2010 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Junagadh, in Criminal Misc. Application (New) No. 482 of 2010, is quashed and set aside. The case is remanded to the Family Court, Junagadh, for fresh hearing on condition that the applicant – husband shall deposit before the Family Court, Junagadh, an amount of Rs.1000/- as compensation to the respondent No.2 – wife. The trial Court is directed to decide the matter afresh after affording proper opportunity of hearing to both the sides as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 6 months from the date of receipt of the writ of this order. The respondent No.2 – wife is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.1000/-, deposited by the applicant – husband before the Family Court.
6. Accordingly, this application is disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(Z.K.SAIYED, J.) sas