LAKSHMY SURENDRAN Vs. SURENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Original Petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, is directed against Ext.P10 order passed by the Family Court. The petitioner is the daughter of the respondent. By the impugned order, the court below has dismissed I.A.No.480 of 2012 filed by the petitioner for amending Ext.P1 Original Petition. The amendment proposed was to incorporate the claim for past maintenance. Aggrieved by the order so passed by the court below, the petitioner has preferred this Original Petition.

(2.) Heard Smt.Sumathy Dandapany, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, and Shri.T.N.Manoj, the learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) The petitioner's mother is the first petitioner and the petitioner is the second petitioner in Ext.P1 Original Petition dated 2.2.2008 filed in the Family Court claiming maintenance and for other reliefs. I.A.No.511 of 2008 dated 2.2.2008 claiming Rs.2,16,000/- towards past maintenance for three years and I.A.No.510 of 2008 dated 2.2.2008 for attachment of immovable properties of the respondent for securing and realising the said past maintenance were also filed along with Ext.P1. I.A.No.510 of 2008 is Ext.P4. Ext.P7 dated 14.2.2008 is produced as the application claiming past maintenance of Rs.2,16,000/-. The records show that this is a mistake and the real application filed for that purpose is I.A. No.511 of 2008 which is dated 2.2.2008. Ext.P1 Original Petition, I.A.No.511 of 2008 and Ext.P4 are dated 2.2.2008 and the records show that all of them were filed on 4.2.2008 in the Family Court. The petitioner got married on 30.8.2009. Her mother expired on 27.10.2009.