IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RPFC.No. 227 of 2008()
1. SUBRAMANIAN, AGED 33 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. C.V.SUHRA, AGED 30 YEARS,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :22/07/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
R.P.F.C.No. 227 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2008
O R D E R
In this revision petition the petitioner assails an order
passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. obliging him to pay
maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- p.m. to the claimant,
allegedly his wife.
2. Eventhough the marriage was disputed in the counter
statement, at the stage of evidence there is an unambiguous
admission regarding marriage. The learned Judge of the Family
Court in these circumstances came to the conclusion that there
was a valid marriage. Annex.A1 marriage register was also
produced. There is no attempt made before me to strain to assail
the finding regarding marriage. There was overwhelming
evidence, in addition to the admission made by the petitioner in
the box, to come to a safe conclusion regarding existence of the
marriage.
3. The only contention on which the order is assailed is
the quantum of maintenance awarded. The petitioner was shown
R.P.F.C.No. 227 of 2008
2
to be a Mechanic working in the Telephone Department on temporary
basis for the past many decades. According to him he has no
employment. The learned Judge of the Family Court took note of the
fact that he enjoyed good health and at any rate his monthly income
could not be less than Rs.5,000/- The petitioner has a contention that
he has some ailments. No witness was examined to prove such
ailment. No oral or documentary evidence was pressed into service in
support of that contention. The Family Court, in these circumstances,
came to the conclusion that maintenance deserves to be awarded at the
rate of Rs.2,000/-
4. I am not satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case,
that the quantum of maintenance awarded deserves to be interfered
with by invoking the revisional jurisdiction of superintendence and
correction.
5. This R.P.F.C. is accordingly dismissed.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm
