JAYASREE Vs. SHIVAPRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the revision is against an order passed by Family Court, Thrissur in M.C. No.298/14. The 1st petitioner in the M.C., who has been denied with monthly maintenance, has approached this Court in the revision on hand. The above M.C was filed by petitioners 1 to 3 who are wife and minor children of the respondent seeking for monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- each. The Family Court has appreciated the evidence adduced by the parties and granted monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- each to minor petitioners 2 and 3 from the date of the petition and authorised the 1st petitioner to collect the amount on their behalf. Maintenance claimed by the 1st petitioner was declined for the reason that she refused to join the respondent in matrimony without a reasonable cause.

(2.) The facts of the case are summarised hereinbelow. For the sake of clarity, the parties to this revision are referred to hereinafter as the 1st petitioner and the respondent. The marriage between the 1st petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 14.09.2006 and two children were born in the wedlock on 15.12.2007 and 21.08.2013. The respondent was working as supervisor in Dubai for a monthly salary of Rs.1,00,000/-. The 1st petitioner was unemployed. The 2nd petitioner has started his education. The respondent ill-treated the 1st petitioner under the influence of alcohol and neglected to maintain the petitioners from 2013 onwards. In the said circumstances, M.C was filed seeking for monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- each to petitioners 1 to 3.

(3.) The respondent filed objection admitting the marriage and birth of two children. The following contentions were raised. He is working as goldsmith and his monthly income is Rs.10,000/-. His 75 year old mother, who is a heart patient and suffering from diabetics, hypertension, cardiac problems and other allied diseases, was maintained by him. After a few days of stay jointly at the matrimonial home, the respondent who was employed abroad left the place. While working at gulf he had a monthly salary of 750 Dirhams and keeping 200 Dirhams for meeting his personal expenditure, the remaining amount was sent to his native place. The 1st petitioner misbehaved with his mother during her stay at the matrimonial home. She was in the habit of leaving matrimonial home on her volition without reasons. In February, 2010, the respondent came to native place and took the petitioners to his house. The 1st petitioner was reluctant to live in the matrimonial home with the mother of the respondent. In 2010, the respondent abandoned his employment at gulf and returned to his native place. Though he invited the 1st petitioner to reside with him at the matrimonial home, she refused. He filed O.P.No.482/2011 seeking for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The 1st petitioner agreed to resume cohabitation during the pendency of the case and therefore the above case was not proceeded with further. After residing together for few days, the 1st petitioner ill-treated the respondent and she left the matrimonial home in 2013 without any reason. Efforts were taken by the respondent through mediators to bring back the 1st petitioner to the matrimonial home, but failed. In a petition filed by the respondent before Janamaithri Police Station, Kunnamkulam the 1st petitioner was called for having a talk on amicable settlement. She openly stated before the Police that she dislikes the respondent. The 1st petitioner had left the matrimonial home without any reason and therefore she is not entitled to get any maintenance. Accordingly, M.C was sought to be dismissed.