IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2008 / 1ST MAGHA 1929 RPFC.No. 13 of 2008() --------------------- MC.196/2006 of Family Court, Kozhikode. .................... : REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------------- V.P.MOIDEEN KOYA, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.KOYAKUTTY, VIRIPPOIL HOUSE, 6/2, VELLIPARAMBA POST, MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.E.ABDUL GAFOOR SRI.A.MOHAMMED SAVAD RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS ------------------------ 1. A.J.HAFSA, 28 YEARS, D/O.ABDUL JABBAR, FORE H MANZIL, NEELESWARAM POST, (MUKKAM PSL), KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. A1 ANOOD HAFASL, AGED 6 YEARS, S/O.A.J.HAFSA, MINOR, DATE OF BIRTH 8.7.2000, FORE H MANZIL, REP. BY MOTHER IST RESPONDENT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ---------------------- R.P.F.C.No.13 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January 2008 O R D E R This revision petition is directed against a direction under Section 125 Cr.P.C to pay maintenance to the claimants, admittedly the wife and the child of the petitioner herein. Marriage is admitted. Paternity is admitted. Separate residence is conceded. That the petitioner has married again while his marriage with the first claimant/wife is subsisting is also admitted. 2. A contention was raised that the petitioner was forced to marry again because of the contumacious behaviour of the claimant/wife who had refused to live with him. A contention is also raised that the quantum of maintenance awarded - Rs.1,00,000/- for the first claimant/wife and Rs.750/- per mensum to the second claimant/child is excessive. 3. The offer made by the husband who already has contracted a second marriage to his wife to come and reside with him along with his second wife is not an offer valid in law at all. That offer has only got to be ignored. The petitioner cannot succeed on the basis of that offer. Coming to the question of R.P.F.C No.13/2008 2 quantum amount awarded, I find the same to be meager and hardly sufficient for the claimants to keep their body and soul together. About the degree of affluence I have tell tale and convincing indications born out by the admitted fact that he had voluntarily embraced the responsibility of a second marriage while his liability to the others remain. In any view of the matter, revisional jurisdiction of superintendence and correction is not liable to be invoked and exercised against the order holding the petitioner liable or against the quantum fixed by the learned Judge of the Family Court. 4. This Crl.R.P must and does hence fail. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr R.P.F.C No.13/2008 3 R.P.F.C No.13/2008 4 R.BASANT, J Crl.M.A.Nos.21 & 65 of 2008 in Crl.R.P.No.765 of 2007 ORDER 17th DAY OF JANUARY 2008