IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 RPFC.No. 116 of 2006() ----------------------------- MC.124/2003 OF FAMILY LCOURT,ENAKULAM ................................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- SRI.JOHNY, S/O.LATE RAPHEL, AGED 45 YEARS, MATHIRAPALLY HOUSE, NEAR VAYANASHALA BUS STOP, ELAMAKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.B.JINNAH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JESSY JOHNY, W/O.JOHNY, AGED 42 YEARS, MATHIRAPPILLY HOUSE, MANJUMMEL P.O., ELOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. JEWEL JOHNY, D/O.JOHNY, AGED 17 YEARS, DO. DO. 3. LAINA JOHNY, D/O.JOHNY, AGED 14 YEARS, DO. DO. 4. YESUDAS JOHNY, S/O.JOHNY, AGED 13 YEARS, DO. DO. (RESPONDENTS 2, 3,4 REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN IST RESPONDENT JESSY JOHNY). ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY) FOR R1 THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SOU. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------- R.P.F.C.No.116 OF 2006 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010 O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Family Court, Ernakulam in M.C.No.124/03. The wife and three children of the revision petitioner had moved an application for maintenance. The averments is to the effect that the husband had treated the wife with cruelty and he had to live the matrimonial home. The family court awarded maintenance of Rs.750/- to the wife and Rs.250/- each to the three children. The contention of the husband is that there had been cruelty meted out to him and he preferred a complaint before the Assistant Commissioner of police and the members of the family and the wife were summoned and directed to live peacefully. According to the husband, when he visited the house he was expelled from the house that disabled him to live with the family. On the contra wife would contend that the husband had been cruel to her and that is the reason for separate living. The court below examined two witnesses, RW2 and RW3 and the Family Court was not inspired with evidence given by him regarding the act of cruelty by the wife. I did not propose to interfere with the reasons RPFC.116/06 2 rendered for separate living. So far as the quantum is concerned, it is not said to be on the higher side. But little consideration is necessary because it has been proved in this case that the husband is suffering from Ischemic Heart Disease and left heart failure. Doctor had been examined and he had proved the said certificate and he had also adduced that there is tendency of cardiac failure for the revision petitioner. The job of the revision petitioner is painting and it has to be remembered especially in the present days, one has to reach at an extreme height to paint and it requires real physical exercise. Therefore exposure of cardiac patient to such arduous work also had to be taken into consideration. But he has to choose to do some work, which will not cause so much of harm and the maximum leniency this court can show is to reduce the maintenance to the wife by 150 and retaining the maintenance ordered to the child. Therefore the revision petition is disposed of by reducing the quantum and maintenance to the wife from Rs.750 to 600/- and retaining Rs.250 each ordered to the three children as ordered by the Family Court. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE sou.