PALLITHOTTUKA ABDUL AZEEZ Vs. KADANNOLI AYSHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. Thepetitioner assailsa revised direction issued under Section 3(1) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(2.) Marriage isadmitted. Divorce is also admitted. That no amount hasbeen paid under Section3(1) of theAct is also without dispute. The courts below concurrently came to the conclusion that the petitioner is liable to pay amounts to the claimant/divorced wife as maintenance during the period ofIddat andas reasonable and fair provision for the future. While the learned Magistrates quantified the amount at Rs.42,500/- (i.e. Rs.1,750 x 3as maintenance during the period of Iddat and Rs.40,000/- being consolidated amount of reasonable and fair provision), the learned Sessions Judge indulgently modified and reducedthe quantum which is liable to be paid. Taking into account all the circumstances, the learned Sessions Judge heldthatanamount of Rs.1,500/-(500 x 3) as maintenance during the period of Iddat and an amount of Rs.25,200/- (7 years x 12 months x 300) will be fair and reasonable.

(3.) The petitioner has come to this Court to assail the said modified direction. It is contended that no amount should have been directed to be paid at all considering the means of the petitioner and state of his health.At any rate, the quantification is perverse, it is further contended.