The revision petitioner herein is the respondent in M.C No.6 of 2013 before the Family Court, Malappuram. When he failed to appear in court, he was set ex parte in the proceedings and ex parte order was passed by the trial court on 13.6.2013. Without much delay, the revision petitioner filed Crl.M.P. No.657 of 2013 in the trial court with a prayer to set aside the ex parte order. In the said proceeding, without making any discussion, or without considering the contentions raised by the revision petitioner, the trial court passed a very short on 27.11.2013 allowing the application on condition that 50% of the amount of maintenance in arrear shall be deposited within one month. The said order is under challenge in this revision. 2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner has serious contest in the matter, and that he seriously disputes the right of the 1st respondent to claim maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. It is also submitted that the parties have already come to terms on a settlement arrived at on the intervention of Mediators, but this very material aspect, though presented before the court, was not considered by the trial court.
3. On hearing the learned counsel, I find that the revision petitioner has got a genuine grievance. I feel that the petition to set aside the ex parte order must be decided on merits. If he has got a genuine grievance or contest, and if his grievance is really genuine that he could not appear in Court due to some unavoidable circumstances, it will have to be considered by the Court, and appropriate judicious order will have to be passed on the application to set aside the ex parte order. If direction to make some fraction of the maintenance arrear is felt necessary on hearing both sides and on an appreciation of the facts presented by the revision petitioner, such a course can be thought of by the trial court. However, let the matter be decided after hearing both sides in detail. In the above circumstances, the application to set aside the ex parte order will have to go back to the trial court. In spite of notice in this proceedings, the respondents did not turn up to contest this revision.
In the result, this revision petition is allowed. The impugned order of the trial court in Crl.M.P. No.657 of 2013 is hereby set aside and the application is ordered to restored to files in the trial court. The trial court is hereby directed to take a decision afresh on the said application, after hearing both the parties in detail. The revision petitioner will appear in the trial court on 1.7.2014 and, notice for appearance shall be issued to the respondents from the trial court.
Sd/- P.UBAID JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.S to Judge