IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2010 / 16TH ASHADHA 1932 AS.No. 519 of 1995(D) ------------------------------ (OS.NO.196/1994 OF PRL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY) .................... APPELLANT/DEFENDANT: -------------------------------------- BANATHUKANDY ABDUL KHADER, S/O. AHAMMED HAJI, RESIDING AT KATTILEPURA HOUSE, MANGATTIDAM AMSOM, 117 VATTIPRAM DESOM, P.O. MANGATTIDAM, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR, SMT.PRASANNA H.KAMATH. RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS: ------------------------------------------ 1. C.P. JASEERA, AGED 8 YEARS (MINOR), D/O. BANATHUKANDY ABDUL KHADER, KARIMBALAKKANDY HOUSE, PADUVILAYI AMSOM, VENGAD DESOM. 2. C.P. JAASIRA, AGED 6 YEARS (MINOR), D/O. RANATHUKANDY ABDUL KHADER, KARIMBALAKKANDY HOUSE, PADUVILAYI AMSOM, VENGAD DESOM. 3. C.P. YASIR, AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS (MINOR), S/O. BANATHUKANDY ABDUL KHADER, KARIMBALAKKANDY HOUSE, PADUVILAYI AMSOM, VENGAD DESOM. (MINOR PLAINTIFFS ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR NEXT FRIEND, MATERNAL UNCLE C.P. MOOSSA, S/O. A.P.M. MAMMU, AGED 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT KARIMBALAKKANDY HOUSE, PADUVILAYI AMSOM, VENGAD DESOM). BY ADV. SRI.M.A.MANHU. THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = A.S. NO. 519 OF 1995 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred by the defendant against the order of past maintenance passed by the Subordinate Judge, Thalassery in O.S.196/94. Minor children of the defendant had moved through their uncle for past maintenance from 1.12.1991. The competency of the maternal uncle to file such a petition was challenged but the minors had to be represented and Order 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure certainly entitles that person to represent since he is not having any adverse interest with that of the minors and therefore I find that the suit is maintainable. 2. The next is regarding the entitlement. The plaintiffs are minor children. It has come out in evidence that the defendant has treated their mother with cruelty and she is not able to reside with him. It has also come A.S. 519 OF 1995 -2- out in evidence that he has married again and he is living with that wife. Children are liable to be maintained by the father and it is also seen that the father is having some business and is deriving income. He had taken recourse to have a second marriage and he is living happily with that wife. The court below has only awarded a very small maintenance amount of Rs.200/- per month for each of the plaintiff which by any stretch of imagination cannot be said to be on the higher side. There is liability for the defendant to pay amount to the plaintiffs and therefore the judgment and decree of the trial Court do not call for any interference. Therefore the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/- A.S. 519 OF 1995 -3- M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = A.S. No. 519 OF 1995 = = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T 7th July, 2010.