High Court Kerala High Court

Rajan vs Ranjini A.K. on 2 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Rajan vs Ranjini A.K. on 2 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RPFC.No. 446 of 2007()


1. RAJAN, 41 YEARS, S/O.GANAPATHI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. RANJINI A.K., D/O.RAMAN, AREAKKODAN
                       ...       Respondent

2. RAHNA, 12 YEARS, (MINOR)

3. RAHUL 3 YEARS (MINOR)

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.BABU

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :02/03/2010

 O R D E R
                      M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                R.P.(F.C.) NO. 446      OF 2007
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
         Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2010.

                           O R D E R

This revision is preferred against the order of the Family

Court, Malappuram in M.C.685/06. Two minor children had

been granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,200/- and

Rs.800/- respectively and it is challenging that quantum the

husband has come up in revision.

2. Heard the learned counsel for both the sides. The

question is only regarding the quantum. The wife would

submit that the husband is a contractor making a daily income

of Rs.500/- whereas the husband would contend that he is

only a coolie who does not earn much income. The Court on a

guess work find that his income would be at the rate of

Rs.175/- per day even if he is a coolie and on the basis of the

same granted the order of maintenance. There is nothing to

prove that he is a contractor. There is no materials even to

prove what is his income. But he is an able bodied man who

has married and has got children. It is his responsibility to

R.P.(F.C.) NO. 446 OF 2007
-:2:-

look after his children. He cannot plead technicality and get

away from maintaining the children who depend on him. It is

true that he has to look after his mother as well. So really

considering the facts of the case and the present price set up a

reasonable amount has to be awarded at the same time S.125

Cr.P.C. envisages a situation where the Court has to take note

of the capacity to pay. Therefore a balance has to be struck.

So I am inclined to reduce the told maintenance amount from

Rs.2,000/- to Rs.1,800/-(i.e.1000+800).

In the result R.P.(F.C.) is disposed of modifying the

quantum of maintenance to the first child from Rs.1,200/- to

Rs.1,000/- and that of the 2nd child is retained at Rs.800/-.

The mother is entitled to draw the amount on behalf of the

children. The amount already paid or deposited shall be

taken credit to.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-