Sasi vs Manju

SASI vs MANJU

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Mar 05, 2024

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1287564

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1287564
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.Somarajan
Decided On: Mar 05, 2024
Case Number: RPFC/36/2024
Subject: Family

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Family

Key legal issue: Family

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SASI

Respondent

MANJU

Excerpt

.....691003 by advs. saju j panicker kurian k jose respondents/petitioner and state: 1 manju, aged 40 years, d/o rekha, mahesh nivas, chernasserry, maruthady p.o, kollam, pin - 691003 2 state of kerala, represented by the public prosecutor, high court of kerala, ernakulam, pin - 682031 r2 by public prosecutor sri sangeetharaj n r this rev.petition(family court) having come up for admission on 05.03.2024, the court on the same day passed the following: rpfc no.36 of 2024 2orderthe husband, the petitioner herein, is getting an amount of rs.40,000/- per month. while in the box he had admitted that the respondent, his wife, has no job or income to maintain her livelihood. the time taken to maintain an application for maintenance which comes to 17 years is hardly a ground to deny the right of maintenance. the amount ordered by way of monthly maintenance is only rs.1,000/- per month, for which no valid reason was assigned by the family court. i am at a loss to understand on what basis such a meagre amount of rs.1,000/- was granted by way of maintenance to the wife, especially when there is a finding to the effect that the husband has got at least rs.40,000/- per month by way of his salary and other income. necessarily, it may be, in all probability, a clerical mistake which requires reconsideration by the trial court. the impugned order hence will stand set aside. the matter is remanded back to the trial court forrpfc no.36 of 2024 3 fresh disposal. till that time interim maintenance shall be paid by the petitioner at the rate ofrs.5,000/- per month. the parties shall appear before the trial court on 26.03.2024. the revision petition will stand allowed in part accordingly. sd/- p.somarajan judge dmr/-

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN TUESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1945 RPFC NO. 36 OF 2024 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.09.2022 IN MC NO.191 OF 2018 OF FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: SASI, AGED 47 YEARS, S/o CHELLAAPAN, FROM KARICHALIL VADAKKETHARA, MARUTHADY P.O, KOLLAM, NOW RESIDING AT VAYALIL VEETIL PADINJATTATHIL, OZHUKKUTHODE, MARUTAHDY P.O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691003 BY ADVS. SAJU J PANICKER KURIAN K JOSE RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND STATE: 1 MANJU, AGED 40 YEARS, D/o REKHA, MAHESH NIVAS, CHERNASSERRY, MARUTHADY P.O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691003 2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI SANGEETHARAJ N R THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: RPFC No.36 of 2024 2

ORDER

The husband, the petitioner herein, is getting an amount of Rs.40,000/- per month. While in the box he had admitted that the respondent, his wife, has no job or income to maintain her livelihood. The time taken to maintain an application for maintenance which comes to 17 years is hardly a ground to deny the right of maintenance. The amount ordered by way of monthly maintenance is only Rs.1,000/- per month, for which no valid reason was assigned by the Family Court. I am at a loss to understand on what basis such a meagre amount of Rs.1,000/- was granted by way of maintenance to the wife, especially when there is a finding to the effect that the husband has got at least Rs.40,000/- per month by way of his salary and other income. Necessarily, it may be, in all probability, a clerical mistake which requires reconsideration by the trial court. The impugned order hence will stand set aside. The matter is remanded back to the trial court for

RPFC No.36 of 2024                   3
fresh     disposal.    Till   that   time   interim    maintenance
shall     be    paid   by   the   petitioner   at   the   rate   of

Rs.5,000/- per month. The parties shall appear before the trial court on 26.03.2024. The Revision Petition will stand allowed in part accordingly. Sd/- P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE DMR/-

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2024 Same Parties SASI vs MANJU Same Subject Family Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.Somarajan