IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 RPFC.No. 88 of 2005() -------------------------------- MC.76/2003 of THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... REVISION PETITIONER (S)/ RESPONDENT --------------------------------------- BHASKARAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.KELAPPAKURUP, THEKKEDATHKANDY, KAYANNA AMSOM, DESOM, PERAMBRA, KOYILANDY TALUK, PERAMBRA. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- 1. PUSHPA, AGED 39 YEARS, D/O.CHATHUKUTTY KURUP, PUTHIYOTTIL, KOKKALLUR AMSOM, KOONANCHERY DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK. 2. JINISHA, 17 YEARS, D/O.PUSHPA, MINOR, REP. BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.SANTHARAM.P THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N.KRISHNAN,J. ====================== R.P.(F.C) No.88 OF 2005 ====================== Dated this the 1st day of March 2010. JUDGMENT This revision is preferred against the order of maintenance passed by the Family Court kozhikode in M.C.No.76/2003. The Family Court has awarded Rs.1,500/- to the wife and Rs.1,000/- to the daughter and it is against the decision, the husband has come up in revision challenging the correctness of the quantum awarded. From the contentions of the 1st respondent it is seen that the husband is a person employed in the Postal Department as an E.D and the wife is said to have 10 cents of land of property. It is also contended that the husband is having 52 cents of property. The Family Court on the basis of adverse inference, had directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,500/- and Rs.1,000/- respectively. I do not want to interfere with the quantum awarded for the daughter for the reason that at the time of filing the petition she was aged 17 R.P.(F.C) No.88 OF 2005 2 years and thereafter she would have attained majority long back and liability of the father would have ceased by this time. It is contended that Ext.A1 shows that 52 cents of land is in the name of the husband and there would be some income derivable from the same. Similarly it is seen from the records that this person is classified as a person drawing TRCA of Rs.2,735/-. Even if small addition is done, the net income would not come so much so as to direct to pay large amount as maintenance. But the wife is also equally in need and she is only left with 10 cents of property which includes residential house. Therefore, taking into consideration the income of the husband and and the need of the wife, the amount awarded can be reduced to Rs.1,300/- instead of Rs.1,500/-. 2. Therefore, the R.P.F.C is disposed of modifying the order of maintenance payable to the wife to Rs.1,300/- and retaining the maintenance of the child at Rs.1,000/-. So far as maintenance of child is concerned, it is made clear that if there is a request for variance of the order of R.P.(F.C) No.88 OF 2005 3 maintenance the party can move the Court under Section 127 Cr.P.C. The amount if any paid or deposited shall be taken credit to and balance need be paid. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN,JUDGE. mns