IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2010 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1931 RPFC.No. 442 of 2007() ---------------------- MC.295/2004 of FAMILY COURT , KANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S) COUNTER PETITIONER ----------------------------------------------- T.MUBARAK AHAMMED, S/O.MOIDEEN KUNHI, AGED 61 YEARS, NO OCCUPATION, HOUSE NO.19, RIYAZ MANZIL, C.P.WARD, THANA,KANNUR-12. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THOTTATHIL NASEERA BEEGUM, D/O.V.K.MUHAMMED HAJI, AGED 48 YEARS, NO OCCUPATION, HOUSE NO.33, THOTTATHIL HOUSE, KANNOOKKARA ROAD, THANA, KANNUR. 2. SAMEER AHAMMED, AGED 18 YEARS, HOUSE NO.303, THOTTATHIL HOUSE, KANNOOKKARA ROAD, THANA, KANNUR.. 3. THANVEER AHAMMED, AGED 18 YEARS, HOUSE NO.303, THOTTATHIL HOUSE, KANNOOKKARA ROAD, THANA, KANNUR. ADV. SRI.V.RAJAGOPAL FOR R1 THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P.(F.C.) NO. 442 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of March, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Kannur in M.C.295/04 whereby the Court awarded a maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- each to two children of the revision petitioner. It is against that decision the husband has come up in revision. 2. Heard. So far as the maintenance to the wife is concerned it has not been found in her favour and the revision is only filed against the maintenance awarded to the minor children. The children are also almost in the process of attaining majority. By this time they would have attained majority. They were aged 17 and 16 as per the age shown in the petition. The Tribunal has only awarded a nominal amount of Rs.1,000/- each as maintenance to the two children. The Tribunal has taken into consideration the fact that just because the children are studying in expensive school the entire burden shall not be borne by the husband. By any R.P.(F.C.) NO. 442 OF 2007 -:2:- stretch of imagination the order of maintenance for them cannot be said to be excessive and both the children are entitled to get the sum till they attain majority. As per the orders of the Court some amount has been deposited and if it is not withdrawn or lying in deposit that shall be given credit to and given to the children, if any balance is there, it can be recovered. R.P.(F.C.) is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-