IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2009 / 6TH BHADRA 1931 RPFC.No. 324 of 2009() ---------------------- MC.19/2006 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .................... REV.PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------------------- SHIBU, S/O.THANKAPPAN NADAR, CHATHANTHARA VEEDU, VALLAKKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS: -------------------------- 1. SANDHYA, D/O.SAROJINI, KUNJUKONATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, ALATTI, THURUTHUMOOLA WARD, VILAPPIL VILLAGE. 2. SHEEBA.S.S., D/O.SANDHYA, AGED 3 YEARS ONLY (MINOR) OF DO. REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER-GUARDIAN IST RESPONDENT. THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------- R.P.F.C.No.324 of 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this 28th day of August 2009 ORDER This revision is in challenge of order dated 28-04-2009 in M.C.No.19 of 2006 of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram directing petitioner to pay interim maintenance to respondent No.2 at the rate of Rs.750/- per month until further orders. It is contended by learned counsel that paternity of respondent No.2 is in dispute and that without giving opportunity to the petitioner to challenge the DNA test report and in the absence of evidence regarding paternity court below was not correct in directing payment of interim maintenance. 2. It is not disputed that the DNA test is conducted and the report stated that petitioner is the biological father of respondent No.2. Question whether that report should be accepted or rejected is a matter to be decided at the trial. As it is, the report says that petitioner is the biological father of respondent No.2. What is awarded by the learned Judge as interim maintenance is only Rs.750/- per month. During the pendency of the proceeding respondent No.2, the child must get maintenance for her sustenance. The provision is incorporated in section 125 of the Code to ameliorate distress. Award of interim maintenance is a way of achieving that object. I am not inclined to think that there is any illegality, irregularity or impropriety calling for interference in the matter. R.P.F.C.No.324 of 2009 2 Resultantly revision petition is dismissed leaving open the right of petitioner to challenge the correctness and acceptability of the DNA test as the case may be, as provided under law. THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE Sbna/