IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2010 / 24TH POUSHA 1931 RPFC.No. 132 of 2007() ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN MC.85/2005 of THE FAMILY COURT,KALPETTA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER: --------------------------------------------------------------- C.K.RASHEED, S/O. LATE KUNHU MUHAMMED, CHOLAYANPARA HOUSE, KARUVANA, THOMATTUCHAL, VADUVANCHAL P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PRASANTH DR.K.BALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS: ------------------------------------------------- 1. KHADEEJA P.K., D/O. P.K.MUHAMMEDKUTTY, PRAKKADAN HOUSE, KOTTATHARAVAYAL, KOTTANAD P.O., WAYANAD. 2. MUHAMMED RASHEED, (MINOR), AGED 2 YEARS, S/O. C.K.RASHEED, PRAKKADAN HOUSE, KOTTATHARAVAYAL, KOTTANAD P.O., WAYANAD, REP. BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. BY ADV.CELINE JOSEPH THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN,J. ==================== R.P.(FC) No.132 OF 2007 ==================== Dated this the 14th day of January 2010. JUDGMENT This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Kalpetta in M.C.No.85/05. The 22 year old wife and two year old child had filed a petition for maintenance against the revision petitioner and the court awarded them maintenance at the rate of Rs.750/- per month. It is against that decision the husband has come up in revision. The parties got married on 23.5.01 and it is averred that the wife had been subjected to cruelty and she returned to her house. A maintenance petition was filed which was settled and decided to transfer 10 cents of land to the wife on or before 31.5.04. The husband did not transfer any land but it is averred that he treated the wife with cruelty and on 14.10.04 she was assaulted and admitted in the hospital. The court below on these facts found that there is reasonable ground for the wife to live separately and awarded maintenance. The factum averred, in 2003 also the wife has to approach the court for maintenance, shows the conduct and attitude of the husband towards the wife and child. It R.P.(FC) No.132 OF 2007 2 was only on a settlement she sent back and the promise was not fulfilled and she was manhandled. Therefore she is entitled to live separately and claim maintenance. So far as the quantum is concerned, the husband is an auto rickshaw driver and according to the petitioner she is having an income of Rs.4,500/-. Though he contended that he was suffering from epilepsy no document is produced. So it is very clear that an young able bodied man with a driving profession has sufficient income to maintain his wife and children. The court below only granted Rs.750/- as maintenance to the wife and child. Considering the age of the child, I reduce the quantum of maintenance of child to Rs.500/- instead of Rs.750 /- but the quantum awarded to the wife is maintained. Therefore, the revision is disposed of, modifying the quantum awarded to the child to Rs.500/- and retaining the quantum of wife at Rs.750/- authorising her to collect on behalf of the child. Revision petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN,JUDGE. mns