IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2010 / 28TH POUSHA 1931 RPFC.No. 144 of 2006() -------------------------------- MC.134/2005 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM. .................... REVISION PETITONER/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------- DAMODARAN PILLAI, S/O.PADMANABHA PILLAI, KUMBALAPPALLIL HOUSE, CHIRAKADAVU VILLAGE, KANJIRAPALLY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DT. BY ADV. MR.TITUS MANI, MR.S.SURAJ (PALATHANATHU). RESPONDENT/PETITIONER --------------------------------------- KAMALAKSHIYAMMA, D/O.KRISHNA PILLAI, KUKMBALAPPALLIL HOUSE, CHIRAKADAVU VILLAGE, KANJIRAPALLY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DT. BY THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. RPFC.No. 144 of 2006 ORDER ON CRL.MA.NO.6743/2006 IN RPFC. NO.144/2006 DISMISSED 18/01/2010. SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... R.P.(F.C)No.144 OF 2006 ............................................. Dated this the 18th day of January, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Kottayam against the order in M.C.No.134/2005. A 70 year old wife had moved a petition for maintenance against her 74 year old husband claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/= per month. The Family Court, on a consideration of the materials found that the husband is bound to pay Rs.1,000/= as maintenance per month. It is against that decision, the husband has come up in revision. 2. Perused the document. It is true that there had been a divorce between the husband and wife in the year 1971 but under Section 125 of the C.P.C a divorced wife also is entitled to maintenance. Therefore, there is no legal bar in claiming maintenance as she remains unmarried. So far as the quantum is concerned, the husband is a retired Village Officer and he is having landed property as admitted by him. He has admitted that he is receiving a pension of : 2 : R.P.(F.C)No.144 OF 2006 Rs.4,000/= and he has got landed property of 1 are and 80 cents. He is also remarried. Though it is suggested that the wife is having property, not material documents are produced to show what is the extent of the property or what is the income. Under those circumstances, the family court considered the matter in detail and held that the wife is liable to be paid a sum of Rs.1,000/= as maintenance. In the late evening of the life it may not be an excess amount. Therefore there is nothing to interfere with the order of the family court. The revision is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl