Abdul Nizar v. Sajeena
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Kerala dismissed a revision petition challenging a Family Court order mandating maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The Court found the magistrate's quantum reasonable and no illegality warranting interference.
What did the court decide?
Revision petition dismissed; interim maintenance deposit (if any) to be adjusted towards arrears.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1945
RPFC NO. 5 OF 2016
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.12.2014 IN MC 158/2011 OF FAMILY
COURT,KOLLAM
REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:
ABDUL NIZAR,
AGED 39 YEARS,
S/O.MUHAMMED KUNJU,
NEDIYAVILA VEEDU, MYLAPUR CHERRI,
THAZHUTHALA VILLAGE, UMAYANALLOOR PO,
KOLLAM DISTRICT
BY ADV SRI.V.A.AJIVAS
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS :
1SAJEENA,
AGED 30 YEARS,
D/O.JAMEELA,
VILAYIL PADINJATTATHIL,
MUYLAPUR CHERRI, THAZHUTHALA,
UMAYANALLOR PO,
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is any illegality, impropriety or irregularity in the Family Court order directing the maintenance allowance under Section 125 CrPC.
Whether the quantum of maintenance fixed at Rs.3,000/- each per month is reasonable and justifiable.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Abdul Nizar
- respondent
Sajeena
- respondent
Mohammed Iqbal
- respondent
Mohammed Bilal
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court