High Court Kerala High Court

Ansalan.K.M @ Ansan vs Stella on 18 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Ansalan.K.M @ Ansan vs Stella on 18 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RPFC.No. 299 of 2008()


1. ANSALAN.K.M @ ANSAN, AGED 39 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STELLA, D/O.V.C.PAPPU, AGED 34 YEARS,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STENY, D/O.ANSALAN.K.M, AGED 5 1/2 YRS,R

3. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY P.P. HIGH COURT

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RAJEEV K.S

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :18/09/2008

 O R D E R
                             R.BASANT, J
                     ------------------------------------
                     R.P.F.C. No.299 of 2008
                     -------------------------------------
            Dated this the 18th day of September, 2008

                                 ORDER

Petitioner assails an order passed under Section 125

Cr.P.C directing him to pay maintenance to his child @

Rs.1,000/- per mensem.

2. Marriage is admitted. Paternity is not disputed.

Separate residence is also conceded. The wife did not claim

maintenance. It is submitted that there has been divorce.

The petitioner’s liability to pay maintenance to the child is

not disputed. Two contentions appear to have been raised.

It was contended that an amount of Rs.50,000/- has been

paid by the petitioner when he was employed abroad

towards the maintenance of the child. No evidence

whatsoever has been adduced on this aspect. The counsel

contends before me that there is an admission in the

petition filed that such amount has been paid. The alleged

admission has been read over to me. There is no semblance

of an averment to show that any amount was paid towards

the maintenance of the child/claimant herein.

R.P.F.C. No.299 of 2008 2

3. It is next contended that the quantum of

maintenance awarded is excessive. The petitioner claims to

be only a coolie. I will take him as a coolie alone. Even

then the amount of maintenance ordered to be paid –

Rs.1,000/- per mensem, to the petitioner’s child by the

petitioner, who has no liability to pay any maintenance to

his wife, cannot be said to be excessive or perverse as to

justify invocation of the revisional jurisdiction of

superintendence and correction.

4. This revision petition is, in these circumstances,

deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.

Sd/-

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-

/true copy/
P.A to Judge