Kerala High Court
Muthalib. N vs Madathil Sareena on 22 October, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2024:KER:78542
OP(CRL.) NO. 480 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 30TH ASWINA, 1946
OP(CRL.) NO. 480 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 14.03.2024 IN CMP NO.1/2023
IN MC NO.278 OF 2023 OF FAMILY COURT, KANNUR
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT :
MUTHALIB. N., AGED 43 YEARS
S/O A.G. AHAMMED, NANGARATH HOUSE,
KOLUVALLI, P.O. CHUNDA,
PAYYANNUR TALUK, KANNUR, PIN - 670 511.
BY ADVS.
P.S.ABDUL KAREEM
NAZIF K.N.
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER :
1 MADATHIL SAREENA,
AGED 36 YEARS
W/O MUTHALIB N,
MADATHIL HOUSE,
PADENA, P.O KAKKARA,
PAYYANNUR TALUK,
KANNUR, PIN - 670 306.
2 MUHAMMED.N., AGED 15 YEARS (MINOR),
S/O MADATHIL SAREENA,
MADATHIL HOUSE,
PADENA, P.O KAKKARA,
PAYYANNUR TALUK, KANNUR PIN - 670 306.
REP. BY MOTHER,
1ST RESPONDENT
MADATHIL SAREENA
2024:KER:78542
OP(CRL.) NO. 480 OF 2024
2
3 SAYEED AHAMMED,
AGED 13 YEARS (MINOR),
S/O MADATHIL SAREENA,
MADATHIL HOUSE,
PADENA, P.O KAKKARA,
PAYYANNUR TALUK, KANNUR, PIN - 670306
REP. BY MOTHER,
1ST RESPONDENT MADATHIL SAREENA.
4 FATHIMA MUHSINA
AGED 4 YEARS
(MINOR), D/O MADATHIL SAREENA,
MADATHIL HOUSE, PADENA,
P.O KAKKARA, PAYYANNUR TALUK,
KANNUR, PIN - 670306.
REP. BY MOTHER,
1ST RESPONDENT MADATHIL SAREENA,
BY ADV M.SASINDRAN .
SMT. SREEJA V (PP)
THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.10.2024, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:78542
OP(CRL.) NO. 480 OF 2024
3
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
......................................................
O.P.(Crl.) No.480 of 2024
...................................................
Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2024
JUDGMENT
Petitioner challenges the order dated 14.03.2024 in CMP No.1/2023 in
M.C.No.278/2023 of the Family Court, Kannur.
2. As per the impugned order, petitioner was directed to pay interim
monthly maintenance of Rs.3,000/- to the wife, Rs.2,500/- each to the
two children and Rs.2,000/- to the youngest child.
3. I have heard Sri.P.S.Abdul Kareem, the learned counsel for the petitioner
as well as Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned counsel for respondents.
4. This Court has time and again observed that interim orders of
maintenance can be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, only when the impugned order is perverse or the amount directed
to be paid, is exorbitant. Thus interference with an order of interim
maintenance ought to be resorted to only in exceptional circumstances.
5. Petitioner was working abroad, and he has been found to be an able-
bodied person, as seen from the impugned order. There is no obstacle
2024:KER:78542
OP(CRL.) NO. 480 OF 2024
on the petitioner earning an income.
6. Having regard to the nature of expenditure that will be incurred by the
wife in bringing up three children, it is necessary that sufficient sum is
directed to be paid as interim maintenance. The petitioner has not been
able to point out any satisfactory reason to interfere with the impugned
order, and on the other hand, the amount directed to be paid being too
nominal, there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order.
7. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the view that there is
no perversity in the aforesaid order. In such circumstances, I find no
merit in this original petition and it is dismissed.
sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/22/10/2024
2024:KER:78542
OP(CRL.) NO. 480 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 480/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CMP NO. 01 OF 2023 IN
MC NO. 278/2023 OF THE HONOURABLE FAMILY
COURT, KANNUR DATED 14.03.2024
