The court affirmed the discretion of the court to determine the date from which the maintenance order is payable, considering the specific object the provisions seek to achieve.

1. In this revision petition the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thodupuzha in M.C. No. 3 of 1978 directing the revision petitioner to pay maintenance to respondents 2 to 4 herein is challenged. The revision petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 70/- per mensem to the second respondent, Rs. 50/- per mensem to the 3rd respondent and Rs 30/- per month to the 4th respondent from the date of the petition, viz., 13-9-1977.

2. It is admitted that the revision petitioner (C. pw. 1) and the first respondent (Pw. 1) were married and respondents 2 to 4 were born to them, The spouses are working as teachers On the date of the petition, the children were studying in the VII, V and II standards respectively. The spouses' are living separately from 2-8-1976 onwards. The children are living with the mother. The wife did not claim maintenance for herself as she is employed and is earning income. On behalf of her three children a consolidated amount of Rs. 500/- per month was claimed. The court ordered only Rs. 150/- per month in all. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner contends that the quantum fixed by the trial court is excessive and that the learned Magistrate was in error in directing maintenance to be paid from the date of the petition and ought to have directed it to be paid from the date of the order.

3. It is true that the mother of the three children is earning as a teacher. But, that has no relevance in fixing the quantum of maintenance payable by the father Father is a teacher. His gross emoluments are Rs. 703 as is seen from Ext. D13 Salary certificate. According to Ext. D13, after deduction, he gets only Rs. 536.78. Deductions include, provident fund subscription, L I.C. premium, a cut for provident loan and also deduction of Rs. 25/- for Bishop's Old Age Home Ignoring the last deduction, his income could be assessed as Rs. 550/- per month. It is in evidence that C. pw. 1 constructed a house by taking a loan from the L.I G H Scheme from the Government. He Has to repay the loan amount in annual instalments of Rs. 1082/-which will work out about Rs. 90/-per month He has no case that he has any other commitment except the discharge of a chitty loan.

4. Pw.1's case is that her husband has let out the building constructed with the loan and is earning Rs. 300/-per month. This is denied in the counter, but, it is admitted that CPw 1 is residing in one room in the building and the remaining portion is occupied by Dr. Punnose. The counter does not explain the circumstances under which the building happened to be occupied by Dr. Punnose. Dr. Punnose is working in the hospital run by pw. 2. pw. 2 has deposed that he arranged the building tor Dr. Punnose and that he himself has spent a sum of Rs. 7,200/-for the repairs of the house and therefore no rent is being paid. He stated Sn clearly indicating that some rent must have been fixed. It was taken for a period of two years. That is why probably pw. 1 has deposed that the monthly rent is Rs. 300/- Whether CPw. 1 gets the money in hand or not, he is deriving a profit from the building which of course may go in adjusting the loan. The period of two years has expired in 1978. CPw. 1 has not cared to explain what arrangement has been made thereafter

5. It was in the light of this evidence that the learned Magistrate fixed the quantum of maintenance at a total of Rs.150/-per month The amount fixed cannot be said to be excessive. It is a reasonable amount; or if it errs, it docs so on the lower side and not the higher side. The evidence does not justify the argument of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that his client cannot afford to pay this amount. In any event, there is no reason to justify interference with the quantum in revision.

6. The other argument is that the learned Magistrate erred in directing the payment of maintenance from the date of the petition. What is at stake is maintenance payable for about an year and odd. The learned Magistrate