DEEPA C. Vs. SADANANDAN P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in this appeal were the petitioners in OP No.432/2013 on the file of the Family Court, Tirur. The respondent in this appeal was the respondent in the above original petition. The respondent is the husband of the first appellant and the father of the appellants two and three. The parties are, for the sake of convenience, referred to as per their litigate status in the original petition as 'petitioners ' and 'respondent'.

(2.) The petitioners had filed the original petition against the respondent, under Explanation (f) to Sec.7(1) of the Family Courts Act, seeking an order for past maintenance for a period of thirty six months preceding the filing of the original petition.

(3.) The case of the petitioners, in brief, in the above original petition is as follows:- The first petitioner was married to the respondent on 30.5.1994. The petitioners two and three were born in their wedlock. The older son is aged 19 years and the younger daughter is aged 7 years. Although, initially they had a happy married life, the respondent's behaviour and nature changed in due course of time. He used to insult and abuse the first petitioner for trivial reasons. At the time of marriage, the respondent was working in Defence Department in Doha. The first petitioner used to do all the household chores in the matrimonial home, as per the instructions of the respondent's mother. The respondent's mother was in a habit of insulting the first petitioner in the presence of others. After the first petitioner delivered the second petitioner, the respondent failed to perform his filial obligations, as per the customs in their community or meet to the delivery expenses of the child. After the first petitioner conceived the third petitioner, the respondent treated her with severe cruelty. He also had illicit relationship with other women. The first petitioner informed about the cruel acts of the respondent to her family members. Even though several mediation talks were held, no rapprochement was effected. For the past several years, the petitioners are living at the mercy of the first petitioner's parents. The respondent has willfully neglected to maintain the petitioners. From 1.10.2002 onwards, the petitioners are residing in the first petitioner's parental house. Hence a decree for past maintenance may be passed.