Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 573 (KAR)

B. PREMAKUMAR v. P. SANJUGTHA

2001-07-24

R.GURURAJAN

body2001
R. GURURAJAN, J. ( 1 ) THIS petition filed by the husband is against the order of the learned Judge, Family Court, Mysore passed in I. A. 10/2001 dated 13-6-2001. ( 2 ) THE respondents 1 and 2 filed a suit before the Family Court in O. S. No. 37/2000 claiming monthly maintenance. Notice was issued to the petitioner herein. The petitioner filed an application under Order 6 Rule 5 of CPC seeking for particulars in IA. 10. The said I. A. was opposed by the respondents. ( 3 ) MATTER was heard and after hearing, the learned Family Judge has dismissed the IA. The order of the learned Family Court Judge is challenged in this petition. ( 4 ) MR. P. S. Manjunath, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner argues that the learned Judge has committed a serious error in dismissing his I. A. According to the Counsel, the petitioner is entitled for the particulars called for by him in the application. The Counsel finds fault with the learned Judge. ( 5 ) IN the light of the arguments of the learned Counsel, I have carefully perused the impugned order. The petitioner in IA. 10 has sought for the particulars from the respondents. The particulars sought for read as under : (1) The date of establishment of the residence by the next friend at Mysore. Is there any document evidencing the establishment of the residence i. e. , lease deed, rent note etc. , if so, the dates and particulars. (2) The date of migration referred at para 2 of the plaint. (3) When did the children grieve the maternal grand-mother. (4) Since when the plaintiffs and their mother started visiting the father and the date when they were driven away. (5) What was /is the amount spent by the caring burden swallowing, composed, dynamic, bold mother towards the plaintiffs. (6) The details of the financial support given by the maternal uncle and aunt. (7) When the plaintiffs' mother was driven away from the house of the defendant i. e. , the date be stated. (8) The names of the elders at the bar intervened may be given with the details of the meetings and its results. (6) The details of the financial support given by the maternal uncle and aunt. (7) When the plaintiffs' mother was driven away from the house of the defendant i. e. , the date be stated. (8) The names of the elders at the bar intervened may be given with the details of the meetings and its results. (9) Whether the next friend is legal advisor to any companies, if so, its particulars the place of Courts where she represents those companies and the annual income she got for the last two financial years. (10) Whether the father of the next friend is giving any financial aid, if so, the details. ( 6 ) THE learned Judge has framed the following point in para 4 reading as under :"whether the plaintiffs are required to furnish the particulars sought for and if so, to what kind of particulars called for?"the learned Judge, while considering these points, has ruled that the particulars sought for are all in the nature of the evidence and for the purpose of filing the written statement, these particulars are wholly unnecessary. In that view of the matter, he has dismissed the petition. ( 7 ) ORDER 6 Rule 5 provides for ordering better particulars from the party in the pleadings, as may be just. ( 8 ) IN the case on hand, a suit is admittedly filed seeking for maintenance and details are furnished in para 13 with regard to the claim in the suit. In the light of the plaint averments, the particulars as sought for, in my view, do not deserve any consideration, as rightly held by the learned Judge. These are all matters of evidence and it is not necessary for the purpose of filing of written statement. In the guise of calling particulars, in my view, the petitioner is trying to protract the proceedings in the matter of maintenance. Even the question, as I see is wholly irrelevant for the purpose of an order at the hands of the Court. The affidavit filed in support of the application to say the least is without any reasons, what so ever. In these circumstances, the learned Judge is perfectly right in dismissing the IA. The suit is filed on 13-6-2000 and as many as 10 I. As are already filed even before completion of pleadings. The affidavit filed in support of the application to say the least is without any reasons, what so ever. In these circumstances, the learned Judge is perfectly right in dismissing the IA. The suit is filed on 13-6-2000 and as many as 10 I. As are already filed even before completion of pleadings. I must observe that the maintenance proceedings cannot be permitted to be endlessly dragged on, resulting in the litigants losing faith in the system itself. ( 9 ) IN these circumstances, taking into consideration the material placed before this Court, this Court has no hesitation in confirming the order of the learned Judge. The petitioner is directed to file his written statement on the next date of hearing. The learned Family Judge is directed to complete the proceedings within one year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ( 10 ) ORDERED accordingly. --- *** --- .