IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 RPFC.No. 105 of 2005() ---------------------- MC.332/2004 of FAMILY COURT, MANJERI ......................... REVISION PETITIONER ---------------------------------- YAKKIPARAMBAN HASSANKUTTY, S/O.ABOOBACKER, AGED 29 YEARS, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, KINARADAPPAN, P.O.VETTILAPPARA VIA AREACODE. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CHEERANTHODI NUSAIBA, D/O.MUHAMMED, MOYIKKAL HOUSE, KUTHUPARAMBU, MAITHRA P.O., AREACODE ERANAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM. 2. AYISA SHAHNA, 2 YEARS. 3. MUHAMMED SHABEER, 1 1/2 YEARS, (MINOR RESPONDENTS ARE REPRESENTED BY THE GUARDIAN MOTHER 1ST RESPONDENT). 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB FOR R1 TO R3 R4 BY SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.BENNY VARGHESE THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sou. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------- R.P.F.C.No.105 OF 2005 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010 O R D E R This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Family Court , Manjery in M.C.332/04. The petitioners are the wife and children o f the revision petitioner. The wife would contend that she was forced to live separately due to ill treatment. She had also proved before the court the revision petitioner had remarried on 26.11.2004. Therefore the court below found that the refusal of the first respondent to the offer of the first petitioner to reunite with him is not possible. The court below considered the quantum aspect as well. The revision petitioner had gone abroad recently and court was not satisfied with the fact that he was having a lucrative job. I am told that he has to come back. He is a healthy very young man who had married again. Therefore he has got a cardinal duty to maintain first wife and children. The award ordered as maintenance Rs.600/- and Rs.450/- each to the children and therefore it is only reasonable and it does not call for any interference. The revision petition is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE sou.