IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RP(Family Court) No. 58 of 2008()
1. K.SUBRAMANIAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. PRADEEP, S/O.VASANTHA,
... Respondent
2. PRASEETHA, D/O.VASANTHA,
For Petitioner :SRI.G.HARIHARAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :27/03/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
----------------------
R.P.F.C.No.58 of 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of March 2008
O R D E R
This revision petition is directed against the dismissal of an
application under Section 127 Cr.P.C filed by the petitioner
claiming alteration of the maintenance allowance granted to his
two children. Under Section 125 Cr.P.C, the Family Court had
directed payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs.600/- and
Rs.650/- per mensum respectively to the two respondents
herein. Claimants are major son and daughter respectively of
the petitioner. Such maintenance was awarded by the learned
Judge taking note of the fact that the claimants though they had
attained majority are physically infirm and are not able to
maintain themselves. That order was challenged in revision; but
the challenge in revision was dismissed. It is thus that the
claimants/respondents are now entitled to claim an amount of
Rs.600/- and Rs.650/- respectively.
2. The petitioner who was employed as a mechanic in the
K.S.R.T.C, thereafter retired from service. He lost his monthly
remuneration as salary; but became entitled for payment of
pension. In these circumstances, he came to this court with a
request that the maintenance amount awarded may be reduced.
R.P.F.C.No.58/08 2
3. The application was opposed. It was contended that
the petitioner gets handsome amount by way of pension. He was
a mechanic in the K.S.R.T.C. He is a skilled employee. He is,
even after his retirement, employed as a mechanic and is earning
remuneration. In these circumstances there is absolutely no
necessity or justification to reduce the maintenance amount
awarded to the children, it was contended.
4. The parties went to trial on these contentions. The
petitioner examined himself as PW1. The mother of the
claimants examined herself as CPW1. Exts.P1 to P3 and Exts.B1
to B4 were marked.
5. The learned Judge of the Family Court relied on
Ext.P3 which shows that the petitioner gets a monthly income of
Rs.3,567/-. The learned Judge further realistically took note of
the fact that notwithstanding the controversy about the post
retirement employment and income derived by the petitioner, it
is reasonable to assume that he must be getting some further
income from such employment. In these circumstances, the
learned Judge of the Family Court sailed to the conclusion that
there is absolutely no warrant to reduce the meager amount of
Rs.600/- and Rs.650/- awarded as monthly maintenance to the
two children. Accordingly, the learned Judge proceeded to pass
the impugned order.
R.P.F.C.No.58/08 3
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that
the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order. What is the
grievance? The short contention raised is that in view of
subsequent retirement of the petitioner from regular service, the
quantum of maintenance awarded must have been reduced.
7. I must alertly take note of the nature, quality and
contours of the jurisdiction of this court sitting as a court of
revision exercising correctional and supervisory jurisdiction.
Unless the impugned order is grossly erroneous or perverse and
such vice in turn leads to miscarriage of justice, such jurisdiction
cannot be lightly invoked. In the facts and circumstances of this
case, on undisputed and admitted facts, I am satisfied that there
is absolutely no need to invoke the correctional jurisdiction as a
court of revision. The order passed by the learned Judge of the
Family Court does appear to me to be absolutely cogent,
reasonable, fair and just. In any view of the matter, the meager
amounts awarded does not warrant interference.
8. I concur with the conclusions of the Family Court and
dismiss this revision petition.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge
R.P.F.C.No.58/08 4
R.P.F.C.No.58/08 5
R.BASANT, J
R.P.F.C.No.
ORDER
11/02/2008