KUNHI MOHAMMED Vs. SAJITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed by the petitioner, who is the respondent in M.C. No. 49/2007 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Tirur, to quash Annexure-A1 and A2 orders of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Tirur and Additional Sessions Court, (Ad Hoc)-I Manjery, under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The case of the petitioner is that, the first respondent is the divorced wife of the petitioner and she filed a petition under S. 3(1) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, claiming an amount of Rs. 12,000/- towards maintenance during the period of iddat and Rs. 7,20,000/- towards fair and reasonable provision. The petitioner appeared and contended that he had paid Rs. 50,000/- towards maintenance during the iddat period and other reasonable provision and as such, he is not liable to pay any amount. After considering the evidence on record, the learned magistrate passed Annexure-A1 order, directing the respondent to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month towards maintenance during iddat period and Rs. 3,60,000/- as reasonable and fair provision for future maintenance. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed Criminal R.P. 17/2010, before the Sessions Court, Manjeri and the same was disposed of by the Additional Sessions Court (Ad Hoc)-I Manjeri, as per Annexure-A2 order, dismissing the revision filed by the petitioner. Dissatisfied with the same, he has come before this court.

(2.) Heard both the counsels.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner submitted that, both courts have not considered the fact that he had paid Rs. 50,000/- towards maintenance, during iddat period and also fair and reasonable provision, which is within his capacity and that was accepted by the first respondent. As such, she is estopped from claiming any further amount from the petitioner. Further, the income fixed by the court below is also excessive, as he is only working as a worker in a hotel. So the total amount awarded is excessive and the orders passed are perverse and against the evidence.