IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 15TH MAGHA 1931 RPFC.No. 279 of 2008() ---------------------- MC.185/2006 of .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------- MOHANDAS KOTTALIL,S/O.MUNDICHI, KOTTALIL HOUSE,KADAMBODE P.O., PANTHALLUR AMSOM,. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. K.RAMANI, 35 YEARS,D/O. KOVALAN, KALLADIKUNNIL HOUSE, PAZAMALLUR P.O.,KODUR AMSOM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SHIBU 14 YEARS, MINOR REP. BY GUARDIAN MOTHER IST RESPONDENT. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.O.V.MANIPRASAD THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CRL.MA. NO.9377/2008 IN RPFC. NO. 279/2008 DISMISSED 04/02/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... R.P.(F.C).No.279 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 4th day of February, 2010. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Malappuram in M.C..No.185/2006. By that order, the wife was ordered to be paid maintenance at the rate of Rs.800/= and the child at the rate of Rs.1,000/= per month from the date of filing of the petition. It is aggrieved by that order, the husband has come up in revision. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records. A perusal of the records would reveal that the matrimonial relationship has come to an end by virtue of a divorce granted in O.P.No.120/2006. So, the status of the wife has become a divorced wife and under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, wife includes a divorced wife as well and in such circumstance, since she is only a divorced wife, question of living separately without any reason does not arise for determination. Therefore as ordered by the family court, the wife is entitled to maintenance from the date of order namely 4.1.2007 which is admittedly after the divorce. : 2 : R.P.(F.C).No.279 OF 2008 3. The other short question is regarding quantum. The case of the wife is that the husband is a labourer by profession. Considering the present wage set up and scarcity of labourers whether it is skilled or unskilled there is nothing wrong in fixing the monthly income of a labourer at Rs.5,000/=. When it is so a wife who has to maintain a child certainly would require reasonable amount especially as the escalation of price has reached a maximum point. The amount awarded by the family court is only Rs.800/= for the wife and Rs.1,000/= for the child which by any stretch of imagination can never be said to be on the higher side. Therefore the revision lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : R.P.(F.C).No.279 OF 2008