IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 RPFC.No. 171 of 2004() ---------------------- MC.246/1998 OF THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR. .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------ RAJAN, AGED 30 EYARS, S/O.MARATH VALAPPIL AYYAPPAN, ENAKKAD VILLAGE, AKAMALA DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.SAJI SRI.ABI ANTONY RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER IN M.C. AND STATE: ------------------------------------------ 1. SINDHU, 25 YEARS, D/O.THAZHATHE KALATHIL KARAPPAN, THOTTAKODE VILLAGE, THONNURKARA VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS FOR R1 BY P.P. SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/05/2008, THE COURT ON 22/05/2008 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- R.P.(FC) No. 171 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2008 ORDER This revision petition is directed against an order directing the petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.500/- per mensem to his wife – the claimant. 2. When the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not want to challenge the impugned order. I am unable to find any vice vitiating the order which warrants or justifies revisional interference with the impugned order. 3. This revision petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge