IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2010 / ~5TH POUSHA 1931 RPFC.No. 30 of 2007() --------------------- MC.684/2005 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------- C. MUHAMMED SHAREEF, S/O. ALAVI, CHENGARAYI PULIKKAL HOUSE, ELAMKOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONERS: --------------------------- 1. K. BENAZEER BEGUM, D/O. MUHAMMED, KOTTAKKODAN HOUSE, PATHAPIRIYAM,MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. NOUSHAD - MINOR, REPRESENTED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT MOTHER/GUARDIAN. ADV. SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY FOR R1 & R2 SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED ASHROF FOR R1 & R2 SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH FOR R1 & R2 SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R1 & R2 THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/1/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------- R.P(F.C) No.30 of 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 15th January, 2010 O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Malappuram in M.C No.684/2005. The unfortunate couple got married on 25.6.1995 and according to the wife, there was matrimonial disharmony among the couple and they started living separately in October 2001. The husband came back from gulf country in 2005, visited the house of the wife and indulged in physical cruelty making her life miserable. Therefore she had claimed maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- for the wife and Rs.2,000/- for the child. The child is about 9 years old. On the other hand the husband would contend that the wife had no reason to live separately and she had left the matrimonial home on account of the feeling that it is not convenient and that the husband is not so beautiful and further that the father of the wife is a Government employee whereas the father of the husband is only a coolie. Whatever it may be, there are materials to show that the matrimonial disharmony has started long back R.P(F.C) No.30 of 2007 2 which fulfill the condition that there is reason for the wife to live separately. Her evidence of cruelty in the matrimonial home cannot be simply brushed aside. So far as the quantum is concerned, the husband would contend that he is getting 300 Riyals from his employment as a cook abroad. But his power of attorney holder would say that it is only 100 Riyals. Whereas the wife would say that he is having sizable income. If a person is continuously employed in gulf country for long number of years, it is certain that it will not be for a very low salary or pittance of an amount. There is a general feeling that when one goes abroad and works he may have at least a reasonable income therefrom. When one stays there for number of years it only justifies that conclusion. But in the absence of concrete materials, one cannot precisely fix the income. Further, it is seen from the counter statement that the parents, unmarried sister etc., are living together in the husband's house. Therefore he has a large family to be looked after by him. R.P(F.C) No.30 of 2007 3 2. Taking note of the entire situation, I feel the adequate maintenance that could be paid considering the income of the husband is Rs.1500/- for the wife and Rs.1000/- for the child. So the order passed by the Family Court is modified whereby revising the maintenance payable to the wife at Rs.1500/- and that of the minor at Rs.1000/- and the mother is permitted to collect the amount on behalf of the minor as well. It will be from the date of petition. The Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N KRISHNAN,JUDGE ma R.P(F.C) No.30 of 2007 4 R.P(F.C) No.30 of 2007 5