IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2010 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1932 RPFC.No. 39 of 2010() --------------------- MC.258/2008 of FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT :- ---------------------------------------- PAULOSE, S/O.OUSEPH, PAYYAPPILLY HOUSE, KURUMASSERY.P.O. BY ADV. MR.AYPE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS/STATE :- -------------------------------------------------------- 1. ROSSY, W/O.OUSEPH, PAYYAPILLY HOUSE, KURUMASSERY.P.O, 683 579. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY SMT.P.A.ANITHA R2 BY MR.P.P.BENNY VARGHESE THIS REV.PETITION (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- Revision Petition (F C) No.39 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March 2010 O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Ernakulam in M.C. 258/08. An 81 year old father and 77 year old mother had moved an application for maintenance against their eldest son and the Family Court refused maintenance to the father and granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month to the mother. The son is even challenging that order of maintenance passed in favour of his own mother. It is true that there is some point between the father and the son for the reason that the father is having properties according to him. But mother is a person who has to either depend upon the husband or the son. That is why it is stated that a lady under the old times was always a dependent. When she is young, she is at the mercy of her parents, when she R.P (FC) No.39 of 2010 -2- becomes a wife, she becomes a person dependent on her husband, when husband also leaves the world, she has to depend the children and thus the right of a women in an Indian society had been always in this fashion. The son owes everything to his mother for his birth and it is the duty of the son to realise that the mother had suffered a lot not only when he was in her womb but subsequently also to bring him up in the family. So it is really a duty which is attached to a son to look after his mother and it is very unfortunate that now such mothers have to approach Court of law for getting maintenance for their lively hood. The mother is not a person with much income. The mother, it is submitted, is having some ailment and therefore, she requires medical expenses as well. Therefore, taking into consideration the fact that the mother has also to pull on and even if the other children are prepared to give something, the son cannot get rid of his responsibility to look after his mother. Therefore, the order of maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month granted by the Family Court cannot be faulted with. I decline to interfere with the order but I make it clear that the Court will have independent consideration regarding the father's R.P (FC) No.39 of 2010 -3- claim against which also I am told a revision is filed. The revision petition is dismissed accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Jvt