RAJESH Vs. LINCY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is filed challenging an order passed by Family Court, Irinjalakuda on 31/7/2018 in M.C.No.60/2016. The revision petitioner is the respondent in the M.C and the respondents are petitioners therein. Parties to this revision will hereinafter be referred to as the petitioners and the respondent in accordance with their status in the original M.C.

(2.) M.C.No.60/2016 is an application filed under Sec. 125(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C') claiming monthly maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.5,000.00 to each of the petitioners. Before the Family Court, both parties adduced evidence. The petitioner was examined as PW1 and Exts.P1 to P4 series were marked. The respondent was examined as RW1 and Exts.B1 and B2 were marked. The Family Court appreciated the above evidence and passed an order directing the respondent to pay monthly maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.4,000.00 and Rs.3,000.00 respectively to petitioners 1 & 2. The Family Court has directed the monthly maintenance allowance ordered to be paid from the date of the petition. Interim maintenance allowance paid was also ordered to be adjusted while arriving at the arrears outstanding as payable and the 1st petitioner as the guardian and the next friend of the 2nd petitioner was authorized to receive it on behalf of her. Aggrieved by the order above, the respondent has approached this Court in the revision on hand.

(3.) The contentions were raised in the revision petition that the impugned order is not legally sustainable and that the court below has not appreciated the evidence adduced in its correct perspective. According to the learned counsel, the evidence that the 1st petitioner was earning sufficient income from her job as a temporary teacher has been overlooked by the Family Court while awarding monthly maintenance allowance at the rates stated above.