IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2010 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1931 RPFC.No. 329 of 2007() ---------------------- MC.550/2006 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------------------ ANEESH P.T., S/O.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR(LATE) PADIYEDATH THEKKETHIL HOUSE, VALIYAVARAMBU, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------------ SREEVIDHYA, D/O.N.PADMANABHAN, NECHIKUNDIL HOUSE, KANJIRAPUZHA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO.3638/2007 IN RP(FC) NO.329/2007 DISMISSED 11/03/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... R.P.(F.C).No.329 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 11th day of March, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Malappuram in M.C.No.550/2006. The unfortunate couple, who are very young, had decided to part with and the wife has moved an application for maintenance and the court below has ordered maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/= per month. A 19 year old wife wants to live separately from the husband for the reason that the husband has treated her with cruelty demanding dowry and a case under Section 498 A IPC is pending. The husband would characterise his wife as a epileptic patient. So, it is very clear that all is not well in the matrimonial home. Even if she is epileptic, it is a disease which is curable. But the documents produced, according to the family Court, does not reveal such a disease. So on an analysis of oath against oath the family court decided in favour of the wife that she has got reason to live separately. It does not suffer from any infirmity. 2. So far as the quantum is concerned, the wife would : 2 : R.P.(F.C).No.329 OF 2007 contend that the husband is a building contractor having a monthly income of Rs.25,000/=, whereas the husband would contend that he is only a film representative. There is nothing to prove that he is a contractor by profession. So even accepting his version that he is a film representative, he may have reasonable amount as income. It is true that he may have to travel and live in different places. Therefore considering the entire materials, I feel that little leniency can be shown by reducing maintenance to be paid at the rate of Rs.1,750/= in stead of Rs.2,000/=. 3. Therefore the revision is partly allowed and the maintenance amount is reduced from Rs.2,000/= to Rs.1,750/= payable from the date of filing of the petition. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : R.P.(F.C).No.329 OF 2007