Judgment :- 1. The revision petitioner filed O.P. 46/1973 for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent. That Original Petition was allowed and the marriage was dissolved by order dated 15-6-1974. The court fixed Rs. 2000/- as compensation payable by the revision petitioner to the respondent. Respondent filed E.P 246/1979 for realisation of the said amount. Revision petitioner filed E.A. 1035/1979 claiming that he is a debtor entitled to the benefits of Kerala Act 17 of 1977 and that the debt has to be deemed as discharged under S.3(a) of the Act. The learned Sub Judge, Trichur dismissed the petition by order dated 28-3-1980. Revision petitioner filed E A 296/1980 to review the order in E.A. 1035/1979. The learned Sub Judge dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by the same the above Civil Revision Petition has been filed. 2. The short question to be considered is as to whether the compensation awarded to a wife on dissolution of marriage under Cochin Nair Act (Cochin Act 29/1113) would come within the ambit of Kerala Debt Relief Act, 1977 (Act 17 of 1977). 3. Counsel for the revision petitioner contended that compensation awarded is not in the nature of maintenance and as it is nothing but a quantified amount intended only as compensation the said amount is not exempted by the Kerala Debt Relief Act. 1977. S.2(3) defines debt. S.2(3) (d) exempts any liability in respect of maintenance, whether under a decree of court or otherwise, from the purview of debt as defined under the Act. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that the amount of compensation granted to the respondent is really intended as maintenance to her and as the very purport of granting the amount is really towards maintenance, though nomenclatured as compensation the amount awarded can only be construed as maintenance amount and nothing but that. 4. Counsel for the revision petitioner contended that Chapter III of the Cochin Nair Act governs the award of maintenance and therefore compensation granted under S.17 of the Act cannot at all be construed towards maintenance. Chapter III of the Cochin Nair Act relates to maintenance of the wife and minor children. It does not relate to a case where the wife has been divorced. In the case of a divorced wife S.17 of the Cochin Nair Act provides for the determination and award of the amount of compensation. Chapter III of the Cochin Nair Act relates to maintenance of the wife and minor children. It does not relate to a case where the wife has been divorced. In the case of a divorced wife S.17 of the Cochin Nair Act provides for the determination and award of the amount of compensation. S.15 of the Cochin Nair stipulates payment of reasonable compensation to the wife in the event of dissolution of marriage. Really, the compensation is awarded with a view to see that the divorced wife is properly maintained and not thrown to the street to roam like a vagabond. 5. As compensation to the divorced wife is really intended to be the source of her sustenance, it is actually in the nature of maintenance. In no other way, the award of compensation under Ss 15 and 17 of the Cochin Nair Act could be envisaged. It can never be a compensation for any tortuous liability or for any other ground. Though S 15 of the Cochin Nair Act uses the word compensation it would really mean that the amount is intended towards maintenance to the divorced wife. As the compensation amount is really intended to benefit the divorced wife for her sustenance it can be reasonably held that the said amount was given to the respondent for her immediate maintenance. After divorce the ex-wife is not entitled to get anything else from her husband except as provided under S.125 Cr.P.C. As the amount of compensation awarded to the respondent partakes the character of maintenance, the revision petitioner cannot claim the benefit of Kerala Debt Relief Act. The C.R.P. is devoid of any merit and hence the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. Dismissed.