RENUKA Vs. VENKATESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for petitioners. Notice to respondent has been held sufficient and there is no representation on behalf of the respondent.

(2.) Although the appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel, the matter is heard finally on its merits.

(3.) The relevant facts necessary for consideration of the present petition are that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent was solemnized on 23/11/2009 and the petitioners No.2 and 3 are the children from the said wedlock. The petitioners instituted a petition under Sec. 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C.') seeking maintenance from the respondent. The said proceedings was contested by the respondent. The family Court by order dtd. 14/11/2018 dismissed the petition filed by the petitioners holding, inter alia, that PW-1 had not placed material on record to demonstrate that she was willing to join the respondent in the matrimonial home; and that the petitioners had not placed any material to demonstrate that the respondent had willfully neglected to maintain the petitioners.