SHAJI v. SUJITHA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
The revision petition is dismissed
Key paragraphs
- Para 33.Ext.C1 is the D.N.A test report as per which it is confirmed thatthe alleged father is the biological father. The only question thatremains is with respect to the means of the revision R.P.(F.C).No.94 of 2003-E-:2:-petitioner/respondent. According to the revision petitioner he is nothaving any regular…
Judgment
K.R.UDAYABHANU, J.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R.P.(F.C).No.94 of 2003-E~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Dated this the 18th day of October, 2007
O R D E RThe revision petitioner is the respondent in M.C.No.136/2002 filedby the first respondent/petitioner seeking maintenance to theillegitimate minor child. It is the case of the petitioner in the M.C thatshe was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse on Sunday July 1997and she got conceived and gave birth to a child on 22/04/1998. Theaccused was tried and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorousimprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-. It isalleged that the revision petitioner/respondent is a construction workerand is earning a sum of Rs.5000/- per month. The court below orderedmaintenance at the rate of Rs.500/- for the period from the date of thepetition till the date of the order and thereafter at the rate of Rs.1000/-.
The evidence adduced in the matter consisted of the testimony ofPW.1, RW.1 and Ext.C1.
Operative part
Ext.C1 is the D.N.A test report as per which it is confirmed thatthe alleged father is the biological father. The only question thatremains is with respect to the means of the revision R.P.(F.C).No.94 of 2003-E-:2:-petitioner/respondent. According to the revision petitioner he is nothaving any regular job. He has denied that he is a construction workerbut he has not explained as to the occupation that he is having. In thecircumstances, I find that no interference is called for in the order of thecourt below. The revision petition is dismissed.K.R.UDAYABHANU, Judgems
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The revision petition is dismissed
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 18 Oct 2007. The bench was K R UDAYABHANU.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.