IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH MARCH 2009 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1930 RPFC.No. 194 of 2008() ---------------------- MC.233/2006 OF FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... REVISION PETITIONER/ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------------------------- E. PAKKER, S/O PAREEKUTTY, AGED 60 YEARS, C/O AMINA, W/O KUNHAMMAD, MAVULLA PARAMBU, KAYANNA POST, NARAYANKULAM ROAD, KOYILANDY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------- 1. NASHIDA.E., D/O PAKKER.E., AGED 32 YEARS, NASHIDA NIVAS, NEAR PERAMBRA HIGH SCHOOL, PERAMBRA POST, PIN 673525, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. (NOW RESIDING AT FLAT NO.12, BUILDING NO.575, MANAMA – BAHRAIN). 2. RASHEEDA, E., D/O PAKKER.E., AGED 29 YEARS, NASHIDA NIVAS, NEAR PERAMBRA HIGH SCHOOL, PERAMBRA POST, PIN 673525, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. (NOW RESIDING AT FLAT NO.12, BUILDING NO.575, MANAMA – BAHRAIN). 3. NAUFAL.E, S/O PAKKER.E., AGED 26 YEARS, NASHIDA NIVAS, NEAR PERAMBRA HIGH SCHOOL, PERAMBRA POST, PIN 673525, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. (NOW RESIDING AT FLAT NO.12, BUILDING NO.575, MANAMA – BAHRAIN). ADV. SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS FOR R1 TO 3 THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P(F.C.) NO. 194 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of March, 2009. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Kozhikode in M.C.233/06. This is a classical case which would prove that morality in life has started dwindling down to a stage where father and children throw accusations against each other. The father, a retired police constable, had moved an application for maintenance against his two daughters and son and they are defended by the wife of the revision petitioner who submits that the father had sold away all the property and he had not looked after them properly which resulted in filing of a maintenance case by the wife and he was ordered to pay a maintenance at the rate of Rs.500/- per month. 2. Admittedly all the three children are abroad. The two daughters are with their husbands and the 3rd respondent, the son is also abroad. It is contended that she is a chartered accountant in a company by name 'Stardest' R.P(F.C.) NO. 194 OF 2008 -:2:- and getting an income of Rs.1,00,000/- per month. It is also averred that she is having motor vehicles in the State of Kerala and through the mother she had advanced a sum of Rs.7 lakhs thereby showing that she is financially very affluent. Unfortunately the evidence in this case is not sufficient to come to a correct conclusion. If a person is abroad and he is earning money certainly he will have an N.R.I. account and if steps are taken it can be proved. If a person is having motor vehicles it is also a matter which can be proved. Therefore when positive evidence is available it has to be produced. Similarly respondents in the petition also did not enter the box and even the power of attorney holder did not mount the box to give any evidence. So the finding of the Family Court appears to be based on mere conjectures and surmises. The matter requires total re- consideration and therefore I set aside the order passed by the Family Court and permit the parties to adduce evidence in support of their respective contentions and the matter be disposed of in accordance with law. But the amount of R.P(F.C.) NO. 194 OF 2008 -:3:- Rs.1,000/- ordered is liable to be paid as it is confirmed by an order of this Court in RP(FC)16/08. Or in other words the effect of impact of this remand is only for the purpose of considering the question whether the petitioner is entitled to claim maintenance from R1 and R2 and whether he is entitled to have the enhanced amount from R3. The parties are directed to appear before the Court below on 4.5.2009. The R.P.(F.C) is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-