Kerala High Court
Yousuff vs Nafeesakutty on 19 February, 2020
Bench: A.M.Shaffique, Mary Joseph
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 30TH MAGHA, 1941
Mat.Appeal.No.375 OF 2014
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP 47/2013 (OLD NO.601/2010) DATED 05-03-
2014 OF FAMILY COURT, OTTAPPALAM
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:
YOUSUFF, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O ABDUTTY, PALLIYALIL
HOUSE, PATTITHARA (POST), NOW RESIDING AT THENKULAM
KOYA'S HOUSE, THALASSERY (POST), PATTITHARA VILLAGE,
(VIA) THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 534.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD)
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS:
1 NAFEESAKUTTY, AGED 39 YEARS, D/O UMMATHU,
VAZHIYILETHIL HOUSE, PATTITHARA POST, PATTITHARA
VILLAGE, (VIA) THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 534.
*2 NIYAZ, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O NAFEESAKUTTY, VAZHIYILETHIL
HOUSE, PATTITHARA POST, PATTITHARA VILLAGE,
(VIA)THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 534. (DIED)
(MEMO DATED 19/10/17 (CF NO.667/17) STATING THE DEATH
OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IS RECORDED VIDE ORDER DATED
30.10.2017.)
3 NUBASHEERA, AGED 19 YEARS, D/O NAFEESAKUTTY,
VAZHIYILETHIL HOUSE, PATTITHARA POST, PATTITHARA
VILLAGE, (VIA) THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 534.
4 NASEERA, AGED 12 YEARS (MINOR), D/O NAFEESAKUTTY,
VAZHIYILETHIL HOUSE, PATTITHARA POST, PATTITHARA
VILLAGE, (VIA) THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 534.
(4TH RESPONDENT IS REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND
GUARDIAN 1ST RESPONDENT.)
BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.ABDU RAHEEM
SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR
THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mat.Appeal.No.375 OF 2014 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this, the 19th day of February, 2020 Shaffique, J The appeal is filed against an order passed by the Family Court, Ottapalam in O.P.No.47/2013 (old No.601/2010) directing past and future maintenance to be paid at the rate of Rs.2,500/- for 1 st petitioner and 1,500/- for 2nd petitioner and Rs.1,000/- each for 3 rd and 4th petitioners.
2. Apparently, the wife and minor children were not being maintained by the appellant. Only question is whether, he has an obligation to pay maintenance and whether he is in a financial capacity to pay the maintenance. According to the 1 st petitioner/wife, husband was living abroad and working as a driver in Gulf countries and he was getting a salary of Rs.45,000/-. Though this fact has been disputed, no evidence has been adduced by the husband to prove his actual salary. Under such circumstances, the Family Court was justified in directing maintenance to be paid at the above said amount.
3. Under such circumstances, we do not find it necessary to interfere with the order of maintenance. Mat.Appeal.No.375 OF 2014 3
4. It is submitted that a case had been filed claiming future maintenance by filing Miscellaneous Case before the Family Court. In the event of any such order being passed, it is made clear that there shall not be duplication of the claim. It is made clear that both orders shall not be simultaneously executed.
The Matrimonial Appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH JUDGE NAB