Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
MUHAMMED ASHRAF – Appellant
Versus
SEENATH C. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision petition challenges maintenance order under section 125. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments centered on mental disability and employment ability. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court observation on maintenance amount being reasonable. (Para 5) |
O R D E R
This revision petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Family Court, Kalpetta, in M.C. No.89/2017 under Section 125 (1) of Cr.P.C.
2. The petitioner is the husband of the first respondent and the father of respondents 2 and 3. The respondents filed the maintenance case against the petitioner before the Family Court claiming maintenance. The Family Court granted monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,500/- to the first respondent and Rs.3,000/- each to respondents 2 and 3. It is challenging the said order that this revision petition has been filed.
3. I have heard Sri.Muhammed Noushiq P.C., the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri.T.R. Rajesh, the learned counsel for the respondents.
4. The petitioner does not have any case that the first respondent is employed or has any source of income. The learned counsel for the petitioner relying on Ext.D6 disability certificate argued that the petitioner is suffering
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
