RAMANKUTTY NAIR Vs. AMMINI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner filed O.P. 46/1973 for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent. That Original Petition was allowed and the marriage was dissolved by order dated 15-6-1974. The court fixed Rs. 2000/- as compensation payable by the revision petitioner to the respondent. Respondent filed E.P 246/1979 for realisation of the said amount. Revision petitioner filed E.A. 1035/1979 claiming that he is a debtor entitled to the benefits of Kerala Act 17 of 1977 and that the debt has to be deemed as discharged under S.3(a) of the Act. The learned Sub Judge, Trichur dismissed the petition by order dated 28-3-1980. Revision petitioner filed E A 296/1980 to review the order in E.A. 1035/1979. The learned Sub Judge dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by the same the above Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

(2.) The short question to be considered is as to whether the compensation awarded to a wife on dissolution of marriage under Cochin Nair Act (Cochin Act 29/1113) would come within the ambit of Kerala Debt Relief Act, 1977 (Act 17 of 1977).

(3.) Counsel for the revision petitioner contended that compensation awarded is not in the nature of maintenance and as it is nothing but a quantified amount intended only as compensation the said amount is not exempted by the Kerala Debt Relief Act. 1977. S.2(3) defines debt. S.2(3)(d) exempts any liability in respect of maintenance, whether under a decree of court or otherwise, from the purview of debt as defined under the Act. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that the amount of compensation granted to the respondent is really intended as maintenance to her and as the very purport of granting the amount is really towards maintenance, though nomenclatured as compensation the amount awarded can only be construed as maintenance amount and nothing but that.