MAHESH Vs. ROOPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This original petition is filed challenging the order dated 19/12/2016 in I.A.No.3799/2016 in O.P. No.801/2014 by which the Family Court had struck off the defence of the petitioner.

(2.) The short facts involved in the original petition would disclose that O.P.No.801/2014 has been filed by the respondent herein for divorce. Pending the original petition, an application was filed as I.A.No.3799/2016 to strike off the defence of the petitioner under Order 6 of Rule 16 read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Ext.P3 is the said application wherein it is stated that direction had been issued by the Family Court in M.C No.198/2002 to pay maintenance. Since maintenance was not being paid, M.P. Nos. 85/2014, 144/2015 and 319/2016 have been filed and the total amount payable as arrears would come to Rs.1,30,000.00. It is, alleging that the petitioner herein was deliberately withholding the payment of arrears of maintenance though he was capable of paying the same, that the application was filed.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed as Ext.P4, petitioner contended that the M.C proceedings have been taken under Sec. 125(3) of the Cr.P.C and if there is non-compliance, the remedy available is to proceed under Sec. 128. The provision under Order 6, Rule 16 cannot be invoked for the above purpose.