HABIBULLAH Vs. HAMEEDA BEEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The counter petitioner in a proceeding under S.488 Cr. P.C. is the revision petitioner. Parties are Muslims. The marriage was divorced on 16-2-1969 by Ext. D1 Talak chit. The petition for maintenance was filed on 20-3-1969. Learned District Magistrate has found that the marriage was divorced on 16-2-1969 but he has stated that a Muslim wife is entitled to claim maintenance from her husband during the 'iddat' and for that a petition can well be maintained. He has therefore, awarded maintenance from 20-3-1969 till 15-5-1969 i.e., the period of 'iddat'. The learned magistrate is in error in having held that the petition is maintainable. Under S.488 Cr. P.C. a petition can be maintained only by the wife or children. A divorced wife, therefore, is not competent to file a petition for maintenance under Maintenance for the period of 'iddat' can however, be enforced in a Civil Court. This Court has held so in Abdurahiman Musaliar v. Ayissu ( 1962 KLT 34 ). The learned Judge has observed:

(2.) Regarding the maintenance awarded to the child, learned counsel would contend that the quantum namely, Rs. 15/-per mensem awarded is too much when his monthly income is only Rs. 60/-as found by the court. But with this slender income he was maintaining both wife and child till the date of wife's divorce and now that the wife has disappeared from the picture, it is not fair on his part to contend that Rs. 15/-per mensem is exorbitant and that it is beyond his means. The result is that the maintenance awarded to the wife is set aside and that awarded to the child is confirmed. The Revision Petition is allowed to the extent indicated and dismissed in other respects.