K SRINIVASA RAO Vs. K RENUKA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent filed an application for maintenance before the Family Court, Secunderabad, against the revision petitioner in O.S.No.86 of 2001 and obtained an order of interim maintenance of Rs.750 p.m. She filed E.P. No.3/2004 before the Family Court, Secunderabad, to execute the said decree by arrest of the revision petitioner. Revision petitioner contested the EP inter alia on the ground that the Family Court, Secunderabad has no jurisdiction to entertain the EP for his arrest as he is a resident of Bellampalli, Adilabad District and as he has no means to pay the amount covered by the decree. Overruling the objection of the revision petitioner the Family Court directed issuance of a warrant of arrest of the revision petitioner, though the respondent did not adduce evidence regarding his means. Hence this revision.

(2.) The main contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is that though the revision petitioner took a specific plea in his counter that the Family Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the EP for his arrest, in view of Section 39(4) CPC, as he is not residing at the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Secunderabad, the Family Court without adverting to the said objection wrongly ordered arrest of the revision petitioner. His next contention is that since there is no evidence on record to show that the revision petitioner having means to pay is evading to pay the decretal amount.

(3.) There is no representation on behalf of the respondent though served.