Shan vs Pooja Prasad

SHAN vs Pooja Prasad

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Aug 01, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1378065

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/1378065
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice a. Badharudeen
Decided On: Aug 01, 2023
Case Number: RPFC/347/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SHAN

Respondent

Pooja Prasad

Excerpt

.....court) having come up for admission on 01.08.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following: rpfc no. 347 of 2023 2orderdated this the 1st day of august, 2023 this is a revision petition, filed under section 19(4) of the family courts act, challenging order in m.c.no.260/2019, on the files of the family court, chavara, dated 29.4.2023.2. heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, on admission.3. in this matter, the respondent herein, who is thewife of the revision petitioner, approached the family court and claimed maintenance at the rate of rs.18,000/- per month on alleging that she did not have any means of maintenance and on asserting that the revision petitioner herein, who had been employed abroad and had been getting rs.1,00,000/-, as income, could pay the said sum as maintenance allowance.4. the father of the revision petitioner as power of attorney holder of the respondent filed objection and denied the revision petitioner’s income, while admitting that he had rpfc no. 347 of 2023 3 been earning rs.30,000/- per month.5. the family court recorded evidence and examined the respondent herein as pw1 and marked ext.p1. the father and power of attorney holder of the revision petitioner was examined as dw1.6. after appraising the evidence, the family courtgranted rs.7,000/- alone as the maintenance, in a case, admittedly, the respondent herein did not have any job or income, even the revision petitioner had any contention before the trial court that the respondent herein was employed and she was capable of maintaining herself.7. in this matter, admittedly and evidently, it is clearthat the revision petitioner is a person, who has been employed abroad as a driver and the income thereof, shall be sufficient to pay rs.7,000/- ordered by the family court, as maintenance. in view of the matter, the amount of maintenance granted by the family court, at the rate of rs.7,000/- per month to the respondent herein, is found to be very reasonable.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1945 RPFC NO. 347 OF 2023 MC 260/2019 OF FAMILY COURT, CHAVARA REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: SHAN AGED 34 YEARS S/O SATHYAVRATHAN VALLACHALVEEDU, KANNIMEL, VALLIKKUNNAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690501 REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI.SATHYAVRATHAN, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O NARAYANAN VALLACHALVEEDU, KANNIMEL, VALLIKKUNNAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT ., PIN - 690501 BY ADVS. S.SHANAVAS KHAN KALA G.NAMBIAR S.INDU RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: POOJA PRASAD AGED 32 YEARS D/O PRASAD, JAYASREEBHAVANAM, S.R.P MARKET P.O.,THAZHAVA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT., PIN - 690539 THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RPFC NO. 347 OF 2023 2

ORDER

Dated this the 1st day of August, 2023 This is a revision petition, filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, challenging order in M.C.No.260/2019, on the files of the Family Court, Chavara, dated 29.4.2023.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, on admission.

3. In this matter, the respondent herein, who is the

wife of the revision petitioner, approached the Family Court and claimed maintenance at the rate of Rs.18,000/- per month on alleging that she did not have any means of maintenance and on asserting that the revision petitioner herein, who had been employed abroad and had been getting Rs.1,00,000/-, as income, could pay the said sum as maintenance allowance.

4. The father of the revision petitioner as power of attorney holder of the respondent filed objection and denied the revision petitioner’s income, while admitting that he had RPFC NO. 347 OF 2023 3 been earning Rs.30,000/- per month.

5. The Family Court recorded evidence and examined the respondent herein as PW1 and marked Ext.P1. The father and power of attorney holder of the revision petitioner was examined as DW1.

6. After appraising the evidence, the Family Court

granted Rs.7,000/- alone as the maintenance, in a case, admittedly, the respondent herein did not have any job or income, even the revision petitioner had any contention before the trial court that the respondent herein was employed and she was capable of maintaining herself.

7. In this matter, admittedly and evidently, it is clear

that the revision petitioner is a person, who has been employed abroad as a Driver and the income thereof, shall be sufficient to pay Rs.7,000/- ordered by the Family Court, as maintenance. In view of the matter, the amount of maintenance granted by the Family Court, at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per month to the respondent herein, is found to be very reasonable and therefore, the R.P.(F.C.) is devoid of any

RPFC NO. 347 OF 2023 4

merits and is dismissed accordingly, confirming the order

impugned. Sd/- A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE Bb

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2023 Same Parties SHAN vs Pooja Prasad Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice a. Badharudeen