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

2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 44258

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
MARY JOSEPH, J
NITHIN – Appellant
Versus
ARYA A – Respondent


Advocates:
RETHESHKUMAR M. SRI. S.K. MURALEEDHARA KAIMAL, SRI. R.SUNIL KUMAR, SMT. A.SALINI LAL

ORDER

Dated this the 5th day of October, 2021 This revision is filed against an order passed by Family Court, Mavelikkara (for short ‘the court below’) on 30.10.2020 in M.C.No.158/2017. The revision petitioner is the respondent in the M.C. M.C was filed claiming monthly maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.15,000/- in favour of the respondent for reasons of inability of the respondent to maintain herself and neglect of the revision petitioner to maintain her.

2. Before the court below, both parties adduced evidence. On the side of the revision petitioner witnesses were examined as DW1 to DW3 and Exts.D1 to D15 and D15 (a) were marked and on the side of the respondent, herself was examined as PW1 and Exts.P1 was marked. Exts.X1 to X6 were also marked as Court Exhibits. On appreciation of the evidence the court below found the respondent entitled to get monthly maintenance allowance and fixed the same as Rs.8,000/-. The revision petitioner was directed to pay the monthly maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.8,000/- from the date of the petition and also to pay Rs.1,000/- as cost, against which order, revision on hand is filed.

3. The averments of the respondent in the M.C were th

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