IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 29TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1929 RPFC.No. 68 of 2008() --------------------- MC.417/2006 of FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD .................... REVISION PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER ------------------------------------------------------- EBRAHIM, S/O SAYEED MOHAMMED RAWTHER, AGED 45 YEARS, BISMILLAH VEED, YAKKARA, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS ------------------------ 1. JASMINE, 35 YEARS, D/O MOHAMMED ANEEFA, PATTANITHERUVU, NOORANI, PALAKKAD TALUK, 2. MUHAMMED RASHWAN, MINOR 12 YEARS, 3. RAFNA, MINOR 8 YEARS. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.GIKKU JACOB SMT.M.A.ZOHRA THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` R.P.F.C. No. 68 OF 2008 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008 O R D E R This revision petition is directed against an order passed under section 127 Cr.P.C. obliging the petitioner to pay enhanced maintenance at the rate of Rs.750, Rs.600/- and Rs.500/- respectively to his wife aged 35 years and children aged 12 years and 8 years respectively. 2. The acrimony between the spouses has a long history. In MC.59/97 maintenance was awarded to the claimants at the rate of Rs.300/-, Rs.250/- and Rs.200/- per month respectively. Enhancement was claimed later and as per order in MC.50/03 the maintenance amount was enhanced to Rs.500/-, Rs.400/- and Rs.300/- respectively. It is in this context that the present application for enhancement was filed in 2006. There was evidence only of the first claimant wife on the one side and the petitioner CPW1 on the other. A medical certificate was produced by the petitioner R.P.F.C.68/08 : 2 : herein. 3. The petitioner was admittedly employed abroad earlier. Now, he has returned from his place of employment. Conflicting versions are there about the nature of his present employment. It is admitted that the petitioner is an autorikshaw driver. The unnecessary controversy whether he is employed as a conductor as asserted by the claimant or as an autorikshaw driver as asserted by the petitioner need not engage us any longer. I am of the opinion that the quantum of monthly maintenance which is directed to be paid does appear to be absolutely reasonable, fair and just. The amounts awarded, it appears to me, to be hardly sufficient to help the claimants to keep body and soul together. The amounts awarded are consistent with the meagre evidence available about the needs of the claimant and the means of the petitioner herein. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in addition to the liability to maintain the claimant herein, the petitioner has married again and has one child in such wedlock. He has to maintain his mother also, it R.P.F.C.68/08 : 3 : is submitted. The petitioner's conduct of voluntarily embracing the liability to pay maintenance to another wife and child must certainly give this court an idea about the degree of financial affluence that he enjoys. In any view of the matter, I am satisfied that the quantum of maintenance awarded does not warrant any interference by invoking the revisional jurisdiction of superintendence and correction. This revision petition is accordingly dismissed. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner then submits that the petitioner may be given breathing time to make payment of the arrears due so that he can avoid the consequence of being imprisoned. The petitioner must show the bona fides by making a substantial payment and then he can request the learned Judge to give some further time. No directions are necessary on that aspect. It is for the petitioner to move the learned Judge of the Family Court for such relief. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks