IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 RPFC.No. 14 of 2009() --------------------- MC.100/2008 of FAMILY COURT, KASARAGODE .................... REVISION PETITIONERS(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------------------------------ 1. USHAKIRANA, AGED 26 YEARS D/O.VENKATARAMANA BHAT, W/O.RAVISHANKAR BHAT M.K. KULAKUDLU HOUSE, PERDALA PO,NEERCHAL VILLAGE KASARAGODE TALUK. 2. KISHOR KRISHNA, AGED 1.1/2 YEARS S/O.RAVISHANKAR BHAT M.K. MINOR REP. BY IST PETITIONER AS MOTHER AND GURDIAN, RESIDING DO... BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS : --------------------------------------- RAVISHANKAR BHAT.M.K.,AGED 32 YEARS S/O.KRISHNA BHAT, RESIDING AT MITTHA KOLIYOOR KOLIYOOR PO, MAJESHWAR VIA, KASARAGODE. ADV. SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR FOR R1 SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN FOR R1 SMT.GEETHA P.MENON FOR R1 SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN FOR R1 THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P.(F.C.) NO. 14 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 15th day of February, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred by the wife against the refusal to order maintenance to her and for enhancement of maintenance to the child. It is really unfortunate that two qualified persons who got married had fallen apart and now the matter has reached the Court for maintenance. They are blessed with an young child who is the real sufferer which is now increasing day by day in the society. The wife who is complaining of the non performance of Seemantha should have realised that the sacrosanct marriage and even the performance of Seemantha is to get a son to liberate the soul of the father. That is why it is always called Seemanthaputhra. The underlying principles behind Sapthapathy in the performance of a marriage takes in the undertaking by both the spouses that they will suffer each other and they will live jointly till their end. The concept of a valid Hindu marriage is to live long as husband and wife and it never contemplates a R.P.(F.C.) NO. 14 OF 2009 -:2:- separation. Now we find reasons for separation. Husband is well employed and wife is well qualified. The demand for dowry comes as a surprise after the marriage and it is alleged that one was prepared to pay in instalments. But the so called demand to the father could have been spoken by the father of the girl and he conveniently avoids the court leaving it to the mercy of his daughter. Suppose there had been persistent and consistent harassment and the life in the matrimonial home was so worst the wife should not have accompanied the husband to Bangalore, living there, became pregnant and come back for delivery. Materials are also here to show that the husband and members of the family had gone to see the child. In any matrimonial life ordinary wear and tear is inevitable but it cannot be considered as a serious consequence for living apart. That is why it is always held that there must be tolerance and especially in the Indian society women are considered to be the epitome of patience which now-a-days is gradually disappearing and which gives rise to lots of matrimonial disputes unfortunately. This does not R.P.(F.C.) NO. 14 OF 2009 -:3:- mean that wives are to be insulted or ignored but I make the statement only to make it clear that the tolerance level has come down. Now if there had been tolerance for both certainly it is not a matrimonial tie which could not be restored. This Court also did endeavor by calling the husband and wife to the Court and requesting them to reunite. The husband was prepared to take the wife. The wife said she does not intend to go at all. It is submitted by the husband that the wife wants to get some employment in her place and when it is not agreed considering the age of the child the cause of quarrel had started. Whatever it may be the Family Court had analysed the matter and also found that the wife's evidence is not trustworthy in this case and therefore repelled maintenance to her. I do not want to interfere with that finding. 2. So far as the child is concerned it is true that the child is very young. The Tribunal has awarded a maintenance of Rs.1,000/-. I feel in the fitness of things as the child is growing up it is desirable to give some enhancement of R.P.(F.C.) NO. 14 OF 2009 -:4:- maintenance and therefore I increase the maintenance to the child at the rate of Rs.1,500/- per month. In the result R.P.(FC) is disposed of by confirming denial of maintenance to the wife and at the same time enhancing the maintenance of the child from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.1,500/-, payable from the date of order. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-