D MURALI Vs. MEENAKSHI; SIVANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the revision petition is taken up for hearing, Mr.M.Chidambaram, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner is present and ready to argue the case.

(2.) Despite service of notice on the respondents, they have not chosen to appear before this Court. Therefore, there is no other option to this Court excepting to hear Mr.M.Chidambaram, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and pass the orders on merits, in the absence of the respondents.

(3.) It is manifest from the records that the petitioner herein being the husband of the first respondent had filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.239 of 2009 as against the first respondent herein under Section 13(1)(iii) and i(a) of Hindu Marriage Act seeking the relief of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. During the pendency of this petition, the first respondent herein had taken out an application in I.A.No. 100 of 2010 under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act claiming a sum of Rs.15,000/-p.m. towards maintenance for herself and another sum of Rs.10,000/- for the maintenance of her minor child and apart from this, a sum of Rs.25,000/- was also claimed towards litigation expenses.