IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 RPFC.No. 137 of 2009() ---------------------- MC.358/2006 of FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------- V.V.SHAJAHAN, S/O.V.V.HAMEED, VELIYAKATH VADAKKETHALAKKAL HOUSE, "SOUBHAGYA", ALUMPADY, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) SRI.PRASANTH M.P RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS -------------------------- 1. SANA SHAJAHAN, AGED 15, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER SEEMA V.V., "SIMI COTTAGE", AMEPADATHU LANE, SHENOY ROAD, KALOOR, COCHIN-17. 2. SUHA SHAJAHAN, AGED 9, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER SEEMA V.V., "SIMI COTTAGE", AMEPADATHU LANE, SHENOY ROAD, KALOOR, COCHIN-17. ADV. SMT.P.F.ROSY FOR R1 SMT.K.T.LILLY @ LILLY JAMES FOR R1 THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO.3756 OF 2009 IN RPFC.NO.137 OF 2009 DISMISSED 22.03.2010. SD/= M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE. cl M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... R.P.(F.C).No.137 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of maintenance granted in favour of the children against their father. The family court on consideration of the materials, ordered maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,500/= to the first child and Rs.3,000/= to the second child per month payable from 12.12.2006. It is against that decision, the father has come up in revision. 2. Heard the learned counsel for both sides. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would contend before me that though there is a medical shop by name “Appothicarai & Co”, the income derived from the business is negligible and therefore, the family court should not have fixed the quantum as fixed by it. It is also submitted by him that the medical shop belonged to his father and on his death, it had devolved upon his five sons and so the petitioner is only entitled to get one out of one the five shares. The learned counsel also drew my attention to the balance sheet for the particular year which reveals : 2 : R.P.(F.C).No.137 OF 2009 Rs.4,500/= as the net income. On the contra, the learned counsel for the respondents had taken me through the deposition particularly the cross examination of the witnesses. It is seen that besides the medical shop, there is another building wherein they get a rent of Rs.15,000/= per month. There are also a row of buildings from where, it is submitted that, the petitioner is getting his share of income i.e., Rs.3,000/=. They have got a residential house and a compound which is almost having an area of two acres. Further, it is submitted that there is some land which can be cultivated with paddy and besides that, he has got another 15 cents of property. Chavakkad is the place where these properties are situated. Now it is considered to be a hot center in the whole State with tones of foreign money flowing into the town. The price of land and standard of living had raised so much in that small town. It has become really an attractive place of the State. Equally when a town improves, the medical facility will also improve and therefore, business of the medical shops also will improve. So, also is the situation regarding demand for land as well as for : 3 : R.P.(F.C).No.137 OF 2009 receipt of rent. 3. Taking into consideration all these things, one has to fix a reasonable amount as maintenance. The wife is remarried and the children at the time of filing of the application are aged 15 years and 9 years respectively. Both are daughters. They are studying in a good private school and it is the necessity of the parents to educate their children, especially in a case of this nature where the children are in a very unfortunate circumstance. Their father had divorced the mother and mother is remarried. So paramount welfare of the children also has to be taken into consideration in these type of cases. So the cumulative effect of this shows that a reasonable amount of maintenance has to be ordered. There is no pin point evidence to show that the husband is having a fabulous income. But without any hesitation, there can be a presumption of having reasonable income for the man. His first daughter has attained majority, that is in 2009. 4. Therefore taking the entire materials, I modify the order of maintenance by fixing it at Rs.2,500/= each to : 4 : R.P.(F.C).No.137 OF 2009 both the children payable from the date of petition. However, I make it clear that the first child is entitled to get maintenance till she attains majority. 5. In the result, the revision is partly allowed and the maintenance ordered is refixed at Rs.2,500/= each to the children payable from the date of petition , 12.12.2006. If any amount is paid or deposited, that shall be given credit to. The guardian of the minors will be entitled to withdraw the amount on behalf of them. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 5 : R.P.(F.C).No.137 OF 2009