A wife is entitled to maintenance if the husband fails to prove a valid divorce as per legal requirements.

O R D E R

~~~~~~~

Revision petitioner is the counter petitioner in M.C.No.216/2005 on the file of the Family Court, Manjeri, a petition filed by the respondent herein under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking an order directing the revision petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- as maintenance to the respondent.

2. It is alleged that the revision petitioner married the respondent on 7.6.2002 in accordance with the customary rites and they lived together as husband and wife for 25 days. Thereafter, the revision petitioner went abroad. There was persistent demand for more dowry and that the revision petitioner was deserted and failed to provide maintenance. 3. The revision petitioner in his counter statement contended that revision petitioner divorced the respondent by pronouncing thalaq on 21.9.2004 and it is incorrect to say that the revision petitioner was working abroad and that he is without any job or income and is not liable or able to pay maintenance to the respondent.

4. With the above pleadings, the parties were sent for enquiry. The respondent was examined as PW1. Revision petitioner and another were examined as RWs 1 and 2. Exts.P1 and D1 were marked. On appraisal of the materials on record, Family court arrived at a finding that there is no proof of talaq and that there is failure on the side of the revision petitioner to provide maintenance to the respondent. The Family court found that though the revision petitioner was having no regular avocation, he was found engaged in driving a jeep. On that basis, the Family court arrived at a conclusion that the revision petitioner would be able to earn at least Rs.75 per day. On that assumption, the revision petitioner was directed by the impugned order to pay maintenance to the respondent at the rate of Rs.800/- per month. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety of the above order, this Revision Petition is preferred.

5. I have heard Adv. Sri.R.Renjith, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, who took me through the the order impugned as well as the relevant evidence on record.

None represented the respondent.

6. Respondent is the legally wedded wife of the revision petitioner. It is admitted. Though it is pleaded that he respondent was divorced by pronouncing thalaq, there is no proof. On the alleged date of pronouncing thalaq, the revision petitioner was employed abroad. There is nothing on record to come to a conclusion that the revision petitioner complied with the procedures mandated by the law before pronouncing thalaq or that the pronouncement of the thalaq was in the presence of any witness or that it was communicated to the respondent. Ext.D1 was produced as if it is a copy of the communication sent to the respondent. RW2 was examined in support of the so called pronouncement of thalaq. But RW1 would depose that he has no direct knowledge. His case is that a communication was received in the mosque from the revision petitioner regarding the thalaq and the copy of the communication was entrusted to a shop owner near the house of the respondent. There is no case that the same was communicated to the respondent. In the above circumstance, court below was justified in concluding that there is no thalaq and the respondent is still the wife of the revision petitioner. There is also no case that the revision petitioner had paid any maintenance during the iddath period or any fair and reasonable provision for the respondent in case there was a divorce. There is nothing on record to conclude that the respondent has any means for her maintenance. Therefore, she is entitled to an order for separate maintenance.

7. Regarding the quantum, I find that the amount awarded is not at all exorbitant. Amount now awarded is less than Rs.27/- per day. It would hardly meet the requirement of a grown up lady. Even if the court below had gone wrong, it is only towards leniency. The revision petitioner is an able bodied person. He can find out a re