IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RPFC.No. 424 of 2009()
1. MOIDUTTY, S/O.MOIDEEN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. RAHMATH, D/O.ALAVI,
... Respondent
2. SHAMEER ALI, 13 YEARS (MINOR)
3. SHABEER, 8 YEARS (MINOR)
For Petitioner :SRI.C.DILIP
For Respondent :SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :25/03/2010
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
...........................................
R.P.(F.C).No.424 OF 2009
.............................................
Dated this the 25th day of March, 2010.
O R D E R
This revision is preferred against the dismissal of
M.C.No.308/2009 of Family Court, Malappuram. It was a
petition moved for variation of the order of maintenance
passed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. As per the original
order, the family court directed Rs.2,000/= to be paid to the
wife and Rs.1,000/= each to the children. The husband now
seeks to cancel the order on the ground of change of
circumstance.
2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would
submit that the revision petitioner is undergoing treatment
under a psychiatrist and that has affected his working
capacity so adversely. He will not be able to earn the same
and make the payment. A perusal of the order of the family
court also would reveal that on previous instance the
capacity of him was taken into consideration only as a taxi
driver. If a person is having psychiatric problem, it may
affect his work. Depending upon the nature of disorder, it
: 2 :
R.P.(F.C).No.424 OF 2009
has to be established by medical evidence. It is true that the
petitioner did not produce any document. But considering
the details given in the petition itself, I feel that an
opportunity has to be given.
3. Therefore I set aside the order of the family court
and remit the case back to the family court for fresh
consideration after affording opportunities to the petitioner
as well as the respondents herein to produce documentary
as well as oral evidence in support of their respective
contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance
with law. It is made clear that till a final decision is taken in
the matter, the husband namely the revision petitioner would
be bound by the earlier order of maintenance. Parties are
directed to appear before the family court on 27.4.2010.
Disposed of accordingly.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE
cl
: 3 :
R.P.(F.C).No.424 OF 2009