IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RPFC.No. 354 of 2007()
1. K.BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 47 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. ASWIN , AGED 8 YEARS,
... Respondent
2. ARUNKUMAR, AGED 3 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :05/03/2010
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN,J.
======================
R.P.(F.C) No.354 OF 2007
======================
Dated this the 5th day of March 2010.
JUDGMENT
This revision is preferred against the order of the
Family Court, Kasargod in M.C 118/2006. The wife and two
children moved an application for maintenance and the
court refused maintenance to the wife and ordered
maintenance at the rate of Rs.750/- to the first child and
Rs.500/- to the second child and it is against that decision,
husband has come up in revision. A perusal of the order
would reveal that the husband has a great suspicion about
his wife and even raised a contention that the second child
is not born to him in her. But the court found that it was a
birth which had taken place during the subsistence of
marriage and there was no evidence to prove non access
and held that the presumption under Section 112 of
Evidence Act would come to the rescue and therefore
found that the said child was born to him in his wife.
R.P.(F.C) No.354 OF 2007 2
2. Turning to the quantum. The revision petitioner is
the only son of his mother. He admits that he is a coolie.
Considering the wage set up and the other conditions
prevalent in the society today and also the minimum
requirement for survival, it cannot be held that the order of
maintenance at the rate of Rs.750/- to the 1st child and
Rs.500/- to the 2nd child is excessive. The learned counsel
raised an apprehension that the mother is not living in a
proper fashion. It is for the revision petitioner, if everything
is true, to move appropriate authority for appropriate
action with respect to the welfare of the children.
Revision petition is dismissed accordingly.
M.N.KRISHNAN,JUDGE.
mns