T.RAMESHKUMAR Vs. SENTHILVADIVU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the husband. The respondent is the wife.

(2.) According to the petitioner, inasmuch as the respondent had deserted him without any reasonable cause, he had been constrained to prefer HMOP No.56 of 2012 on the file of the Sub-Court, Tirupatthur for dissolution of the marriage and it is stated by the petitioner that the said OP was allowed exparte and thereafter, the respondent had filed the interlocutory application to set aside the exparte order and the said application is pending.

(3.) Further, according to the petitioner, the respondent has filed I.A.No.14 of 2016 in the said OP for interim maintenance and that, he is contesting the said matter by filing a counter on the footing that the respondent is not entitled to maintenance as she had deserted him on her own accord without justifiable reason. It is further stated by the petitioner that the order had been passed in the said O.P. i.e. in the abovesaid I.A.No.14 of 2016 directing him to remit a sum of Rs. 6,000/- every month i.e. Rs. 3,000/- for the respondent and Rs. 3,000/- for the child and also to pay cost of Rs. 100/- for every hearing and according to the petitioner, he is pursuing further remedy against the abovesaid order.