IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931 RPFC.No. 120 of 2008() ---------------------- MC.26/2007 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------------------- K.MUHAMMED, S/O.KUNHAHAMMED MUSALIAR, KALATHINGAL VEEDU, MANHAPPATTA, ELANKUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS: --------------------------------------------- 1. HAFSATH, D/O.MUHAMMED, PADANILATH VEEDU, KANDALAPPATTA, THRIKKALANGODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SHANA, 10 YEARS - MINOR. 3. FATHIMATHUL AFNA, 7 YEARS - MINOR. 4. ANNA, 4 YEARS - MINOR (MINOR PETITIONERS ARE REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN MOTHER IST PETITIONER) R1 TO R4 BY ADV. MR.P.VIJAYA BHANU, MR.P.VENUGOPAL (1086/92). THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO.5695/2009 IN RP(FC) NO.120/2008 DISMISSED 12/01/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P.(F.C.) NO. 120 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Malappuram in M.C.26/07. The Family Court awarded a sum of Rs.800/- to the wife, Rs.800/- to the first child, Rs.500/- to the 2nd child and Rs.400/- to the third child thereby totaling a sum of Rs.2,500/-. It is challenging that decision the husband has come up in revision. 2. So far as the ground to live separately is concerned I am satisfied that the Family Court had considered the matter in the correct perspective and found that the wife and children are entitled to live separately and claim maintenance. The husband and wife had been fighting and even after the reconciliation had been left at peril half way and the matrimonial relationship is full of tensions and unpleasantness. Therefore I do not propose to interfere with the finding on the said question. R.P.(F.C.) NO. 120 OF 2008 -:2:- 3. Now only regarding the quantum. Though it is contended that the wife had a job of tailoring it has been given a go by at the stage of evidence and submitted that there is no income for her at all. The husband is a driver by profession and the Family Court considered the income at Rs.5,000/- and granted the quantum. It is submitted that the mother of the husband is a patient suffering from blood pressure and Ext.A1 is produced to prove the same. It is a well known fact that the daily expenses of drivers would be more than that of an ordinary person considering the nature of their job and the distance they travel everyday that too without any rest. Therefore taking note of the entire situation I think some reduction can be made thereby reducing the quantum of maintenance to the wife at Rs.700/-, to the first child, Rs.600/-, to the 2nd child, Rs.500/- and the third child Rs.400/- thus making a total sum of Rs.2,200/-. The maintenance has to be paid from the date of filing of the M.C. R.P.(F.C.) is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-