IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RPFC.No. 25 of 2001()
1. BABU
... Petitioner
Vs
1. BINDU.N.K.
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :21/05/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
----------------------
R.P.F.C.No.25 of 2001
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of May 2008
O R D E R
This revision petition is filed by the petitioner claiming to
be aggrieved by an order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C
whereunder he is obliged to pay an amount of Rs.400/- per
mensum to the claimant, his wife.
2. The marriage is admitted. Separate residence is also
admitted. The petitioner raised a contention that he, a coolie, is
not having sufficient means. He raised a further contention that
the claimant is not unable to maintain herself. He took up a
further plea that the claimant was residing separately without
any justifiable cause. It was also contended that the quantum of
maintenance claimed – at the rate of Rs.500/- per mensum is
excessive.
3. The claimant had contended that the petitioner was
guilty of matrimonial cruelty of the culpable variety and that she
is not, in these circumstances, willing to reside along with the
petitioner herein.
4. Parties went to trial on these contentions. The
claimant examined herself as PW1 and the petitioner herein
R.P.F.C.No.25/01 2
examined himself as RW1. No documents were marked. The
learned Judge of the Family Court, on an anxious consideration of
all the relevant inputs came to the conclusion that the claimant has
succeeded in establishing her claim for separate maintenance. The
court found that the claimant is unable to maintain herself and she
is residing separately on account of matrimonial cruelty. It was
further found that the petitioner was having sufficient means. He
admittedly being a person, a coolie, getting an income of Rs.75/- to
Rs.80/- per day. It was, in these circumstances, that the learned
Judge proceeded to direct payment of an amount of Rs.400/- per
mensum. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned
order.
5. What is the grievance? The learned counsel for the
petitioner only contends that the quantum of maintenance awarded
is excessive and that at any rate the award of Rs.400/- per mensum
is not justified.
6. I am unable to find any merit in the challenge raised. I
concur with the conclusions of the Family Court that the claimant is
unable to maintain herself and that the petitioner having sufficient
means has refused and neglected to maintain the claimant. On the
R.P.F.C.No.25/01 3
admitted evidence of the claimant, he gets Rs.75/- to Rs.80/- per day
from his employment as a coolie. In these circumstances, viewed
from any angle, the direction to pay an amount of Rs.400/- is found
to be absolutely justified. I find no merit in the challenge raised.
7. This R.P.F.C is in these circumstances dismissed.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
R.P.F.C.No.25/01 4
R.P.F.C.No.25/01 5
R.BASANT, J
R.P.F.C.No.25 of 2001
ORDER
21/05/2008