The court upheld the determination of monthly maintenance for the wife and child, confirming the petitioner's obligation under law.

O R D E R

This revision petition has been filed challenging the order passed in a proceedings under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioner is the husband of the first respondent and father of the second respondent. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed maintenance case against the petitioner before the Family Court, Nedumangad as M.C. No.139/2018 claiming maintenance. The Family Court, after trial, granted monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.8,000/- to the first respondent and Rs.5,000/- to the second respondent. It is challenging the said order that this revision petition has been filed.

3. I have heard Adv.Liju, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Adv.V.K. Hema, the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2.

4. The marriage and paternity are not in dispute. The petitioner being the legally wedded husband of the first respondent and the father of the second respondent is legally and morally bound to maintain them. Admittedly, the petitioner and the first respondent are living apart. The first respondent has a definite case that the petitioner is a drunkard and it is not safe for her to live with him. The Family Court on appreciation of evidence found that the first respondent is residing away from the petitioner for sufficient reasons. I see no reason to interfere with the said factual finding.

5. Admittedly, the petitioner is a coolie worker. He was 40 years old at the time of filing the maintenance case. Considering the ability and means of the petitioner and the requirements of respondents 1 and 2, the monthly maintenance granted by the Family Court appears to be reasonable. I see no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order.

Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed.