IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
K.HASSAINAR SHARJID – Appellant
Versus
A. SHAMNA – Respondent
RPFC NO. 336 OF 2018 | MC NO.215 OF 2914
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. maintenance rights persist despite ongoing claims. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. legal counsel arguments regarding right to maintenance. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. conclusion on awards and rights of claimants. (Para 5) |
ORDER
This revision is filed against the order dated 23.05.2019 in MC No.215/2014 on the files of the Family Court, Tirur. As per the impugned order, the Family Court granted maintenance to the respondents @ Rs.15,000/-, Rs.10,000/- and Rs.5,000/-
respectively. Aggrieved by the same, this revision is filed.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the respondents.
3. When this revision came up for consideration, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 1st respondent is a divorced woman and she has already filed a petition under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce)
Act, as evident by Annexure-A2.
4. The counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that even now the case is pending and till orders are passed and the amount due is received, the respondents are entitled to get maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. I think, there is a force in the argument of the respondents. If a petition is filed by the 1st respondent for claiming benefits under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act , the right of the respondents to get maintenance under Cr.P.C will continue till the amount due as per of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Divorce) Act are actually paid. (See paragraph No.34 of Mohd.Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana [ 2024 KHC 6356] )
5. The marriage and paternity of the respondents are not disputed in this case. A perusal of paragraphs 36 and 37 of the impugned order would show the capacity of the petitioner. I see no reason to interfere with the quantum of maintenance awarded by the family court. But, I make it clear that, if an order under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act is passed and the 1st respondent received the amount, the petitioner need not pay maintenance to the 1st respondent. As far as the children are concerned, they are entitled maintenance only till they attain majority on condition that they have no other physical disabilities.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.