MUHAMMED ABDURAHIMAN SAQAFI Vs. SALMATH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the respondent in M.C. No. 1116/2009 on the files of the Family Court, Malappuram, which was filed by the respondents herein claiming maintenance allowance from the revision petitioner under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. According to the 1st respondent, her marriage with the revision petitioner was solemnised on 23.10.2003 and they lived together up to 2008. They were blessed with two daughters in the said wedlock. From 2008 onwards they are living separately due to matrimonial discordancy. The revision petitioner used to ill-treat her and when the physical as well as mental harassment had become intolerable, she was constrained to leave the company of the revision petitioner and left away with the second child (2nd respondent herein). She filed a complaint alleging offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code against the revision petitioner and the same is also pending. Now the elder daughter is with the revision petitioner and the younger daughter is with the respondent. According to the 1st respondent, she has no job or any sources of income and she is unable to maintain herself and the 2nd respondent. Now she is depending upon her family members. Whereas the petitioner is a religious scholar and he is a post graduate in English literature. He is working as Imam of Muhdeen Juma Masjid at Mooriyad in Kozhikode District. He had written and published several books. In addition to that, he is a real estate broker and having landed properties extending two acres. He is having a total monthly income of Rs. 40,000/-. Hence, the respondents claimed maintenance allowance @ Rs. 4,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- respectively.

(2.) The revision petitioner filed a counter statement admitting the marital status of the 1st respondent and the paternity of the 2nd respondent. But he denied allegations of cruelty and harassment levelled against him. He further admitted that he is a post graduate and employed as Imam of Muhdeen Juma Masjid at Mooriyad in Kozhikode District. When the revision petitioner was examined, he himself admitted that he had written and published several books. He produced Ext. B2 salary certificate, which shows that he is getting Rs. 2,100/- per month. According to the revision petitioner, the maintenance allowance claimed by the respondents is not proportionate with his income.

(3.) After considering the evidence on record the learned Family Court Judge directed the revision petitioner to pay maintenance allowance @ Rs. 2,500/- to the 1st respondent and Rs. 800/- to the 2nd respondent from the date of petition. The legality of the entitlement of maintenance allowance and the correctness of the quantum of maintenance allowance fixed by the court below are under challenge in this revision petition.