VASUDEVAN NAIR Vs. KALLIANI AMMA GOURI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who was the husband of the 1st respondent and father of respondents 2 to 5, has come up in revision against the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chengannur in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 862/68 which arose out of miscellaneous case No. 54/62 of the same court enhancing the maintenance to be paid by the petitioner to the respondents 2 to 5 from Rs. 22/- to Rs. 50/- a month.

(2.) The respondents filed miscellaneous case No. 54/62 in the lower court under S.488 Cr. PC. for maintenance alleging that the petitioner neglected to maintain them. During the pendency of that petition the marriage relationship between the petitioner and the 1st respondent was dissolved through court and the claim of respondents 2 to 5 for maintenance to be paid by the petitioner was also settled on the basis of a compromise petition put in the lower court on 7-2-63. The petitioner and the 1st respondent allowed an order to be passed by the lower court granting maintenance to respondents 2 to 5 at the rate of Rs. 5-50 each every month beginning from 7-2-63. That order has been in force since then.

(3.) While so, the respondents filed the criminal miscellaneous petition referred to above in miscellaneous case No. 54/62 on 5 6 68 demanding for higher rate of maintenance to respondents 2 to 5 at the rate of Rs. 100/- a month on the ground that there had been change in the circumstances of the parties. The respondents contended that at the time of the filing of the compromise petition the salary of the petitioner as an assistant teacher was only Rs. 140/- while his present salary as the Headmaster of one Lower Primary School at Kayamkulam was Rs. 278/- as show in Ext. P1 certificate issued by the Asst. Educational Officer, Kayamkulam. The petitioner, without disputing the quantum of his salary, contended that he had to maintain his second wife and to pay instalments of the money which he borrowed as loan from the Government as well as to contribute amount to the Provident Fund. But, the court on a consideration of the evidence in the case passed the impugned order on 23-11- 68 enhancing the rate of maintenance to Rs. 50/- from the original amount of Rs. 22/-. The sum of Rs. 50/- was fixed allowing Rs. 20/- to the 2nd respondent and Rs. 10/- each to the respondents 3 to 5.