IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1931 RPFC.No. 512 of 2007() ---------------------- MC.118/2006 of FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ---------------------------------------------------------- THRESSIAMMA, W/O. KUNJU VAREED, MADAVANA HOUSE, KODUSSERY, PARAKKADAVU P.O. BY ADVS. MR.A.JAYASANKAR, MR.MANU GOVIND. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------------- JENSON, S/O. KUNJU VAREED, MADAVANA HOUSE, KODUSSERY, PARAKKADAVU P.O. BY ADVS. MR.K.S.MOHAMED HASHIM, MR.V.M.SAJAN. THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... R.P.(F.C).No.512 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 25th day of February, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred by an aged mother against her 32 year old son for maintenance. The family court held that there is no reason to live separately and that the son is not liable to maintain the mother and dismissed the application. It is against that decision, the mother has come up before this Court. 2. The mother, who is the back bone of the family now a days has to frequently visit the courts for subsistence and, who carries a child for a period of 10 months, is now asked not to claim maintenance from the son. 3. The mother would contend that son and his wife used to treat her with cruelty and even to the extent of taking her to a psychiatric hospital and she had undergone admission in that hospital for four days. It is submitted by the mother that it is impossible for her to live in that environment and therefore she has started living with her brother and is claiming maintenance. : 2 : R.P.(F.C).No.512 OF 2007 4. The son on the other hand would contend that the mother is mentally ill and that she is not looking after the father and that he is only having a meagre income and therefore he cannot be saddled with the liability of maintaining his own mother. If the mother is so bad, certainly no court of law would order maintenance when it is found that there is resources for her also. It is very interesting to note that even the father came in aid of the son to deprive maintenance to the mother. The father would complain that the wife is not looking after him. The factum of version given by the mother is to the effect that the son and his wife were treating her with cruelty and she was taken to the hospital is an indication of the state of affairs prevailing in that house. Under ordinary circumstances, a mother will never leave her husband or son, if she is at least cared in the remotest way. But when things go beyond the same, then they may also have to resort for their existence. The family court considered this matter in a highly technical manner to arrive at a decision. When the mother testifies before the court that she was taken to the hospital without : 3 : R.P.(F.C).No.512 OF 2007 any reason, the son could have produced some documents to show what was her real problem. It has to be remembered that suppose a person is suffering from psychic disorder, he cannot be cured within a period of 4 days and that person may be constantly continuing the treatment. Not even a scrap of paper is produced before the court to show that she had ever continued treatment for psychic disorder after 31.3.2006. Therefore her story that she was taken to the hospital under some protext appears to be more reasonable and acceptable. If such is the situation, can anybody compel such a mother to have residence in a house with the persons who are alleged to have done this act. The definite answer would be no and therefore, she will be entitled to live separately. 5. So far the income aspect is concerned, there is nothing before the court that she is having any independent property and she is being looked after her brother. It is true that the son is not having great financial resources and the document produced before the court would show that he was only having a very low income, that is about Rs.3,180/=. : 4 : R.P.(F.C).No.512 OF 2007 He is also burdened with the responsibility of looking after his father, wife, child and his widowed sister and her child. So, there is really necessity for him also to have a reasonable amount to run his family. But it will not take away the responsibility of the son to look after his mother and therefore I feel that at least a nominal amount has to be awarded to her as maintenance. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case. I feel the amount of Rs.500/= at this stage will suffice and that shall be the order of maintenance payable from the date of petition. 6. In the result, the order under challenge is set aside and the revision is allowed. I find that the respondent in the revision petition namely the son is bound to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.500/= per month to the mother namely the revision petitioner from the date of filing of the petition. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 5 : R.P.(F.C).No.512 OF 2007