JUDGMENT

This revision petition has been filed challenging the interim order of maintenance passed by the Family Court, Vatakara in CMP.No.89/2025 in MC.No.17/2024.

2. The petitioner is the husband of the respondent No.1 and father of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The respondents filed the petition for interim maintenance. The Family Court rejected the prayer of the respondent No.1 for interim maintenance. However, interim monthly maintenance was granted to respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The petitioner being the father of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 is legally and morally liable to maintain respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The respondent No.2 is aged fourteen years and the respondent No.3 is aged six years. Considering the status of the petitioner and requirements of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3, the interim monthly maintenance of ₹5,000/- and ₹3,000/- ordered to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 respectively appears to be reasonable. I see no merit in the original petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed.