SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Online)(KER) 30216

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
M.N.KRISHNAN, J
M.P.ISMAIL – Appellant
Versus
HASEENA – Respondent


Advocates:
MR.K.M.FIROZ, SMT.K.V.RESHMI

O R D E R

Both these revisions are preferred against the order of the Family Court, Kozhikode in M.C.No.374/2007. R.P.(F.C). No.167 OF 2009 is preferred by the husband challenging the quantum and the other revision is filed by the wife and children raising inadequacy of the quantum.

2. Heard the learned counsel for both sides. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the wife and children that enhancement is sought for only with respect to the children in the case. Along with the maintenance case, there was a case for restitution of conjugal rights as well and the said case was dismissed by the trial court and I am informed that a matrimonial appeal is pending before the Division Bench of this Court. The learned counsel also submits before me that she had moved an application for divorce and obtained divorce. Therefore the reason to live separately does not deserve consideration at this stage.

3. The next question is regarding the quantum.

According to the wife, the husband was employed abroad and he is an expert cook and he is having large income from his profession. On the other hand, the husband would contend that he was not able to continue his job at gulf and therefore has come

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top