SHAHIDA BEEVI Vs. MUHAMMED BASHEER MEKUMKARA PUTHEN VEEDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 1st appellant is the wife and the other appellants are the children of the respondent. The family court granted a decree, but far less than the expectation of the appellants. Therefore they are in appeal.

(2.) The case of the appellants may be briefly stated as follows: The respondent married the 1st appellant on 05.11991. Appellants 2 to 4 were born in the wedlock. The respondent had appropriated the money and gold ornaments of the 1st appellant. He always ill-treated and harassed her. He even disputed the paternity of appellants 3 and 4. The respondent neglected to maintain the appellants and deserted them on 27.10.1995. The appellants are entitled to get maintained by the respondent. He is in police service as a cook. His monthly salary is Rs 8, 000/-. He is bound to pay maintenance to the appellants at the monthly rates of Rs 1, 000/- to the 1st appellant and Rs 750/- to each of the other appellants. The appellants are entitled to past maintenance also.

(3.) The respondent filed written-statement. His contentions go as under: He did not desert his wife. He never harassed her. She deserted him on 28.10.1995. He was harassed by her and her people. The 1st appellant is not entitled to any maintenance as she lives separately without the consent of the respondent. Appellants 3 and 4 are not the children of the respondent. Therefore they too are not entitled to maintenance from the respondent. He is willing to maintain the 2nd appellant. The salary of the respondent is only Rs 3, 000/- per month. He has to look after his aged father.