JUDGMENT : Harilal, J. This original petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Family Court, Irinjalakuda on a preliminary issue in respect of the maintainability of the original petition in O.P.No.543/2015. The petitioner herein is the stepmother of the respondent. She filed an original petition against the son of her husband claiming past and future maintenance before the Family Court, Irinjalakuda under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 [for short, the Act]. According to the petitioner, she has no means for her livelihood. Being a stepmother of the respondent, she is entitled to get maintenance allowance from the respondent, and he has sufficient means to pay the maintenance allowance. The respondent entered appearance and resisted the claim for maintenance contending that the petitioner is a stepmother, who has a child of her own. So, she has no legal right to claim maintenance allowance from the respondent, under the said Act. 2. The family court raised a preliminary issue on the maintainability of the petition as to whether the claim of the petitioner is legally sustainable or not? After considering the rival pleas, the Family Court, Irinjalakuda rejected the claim for maintenance, on a finding that the petitioner is a stepmother having a child of her own. So she is not entitled to get maintenance allowance from her husband's children. That apart, the husband of the petitioner executed a Will deed, reserving the life estate in favour of the petitioner and thereby the petitioner got sufficient means for her livelihood. The legality and correctness of the findings, whereby the family court rejected the claim for maintenance, are challenged in this original petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 4. The case of the petitioner is that she is a stepmother and thereby she is entitled to get maintenance allowance, under Section 20 of the Act. For an easy reference, Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act is extracted below:- 20. Maintenance of children and aged parents.- (1) Subject to the provisions of this section a Hindu is bound, during his or her lifetime, to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and his or her aged or infirm parents. (2) A legitimate or illegitimate child may claim maintenance from his or her father or mother so long as the child is a minor. (2) A legitimate or illegitimate child may claim maintenance from his or her father or mother so long as the child is a minor. (3) The obligation of a person to maintain his or her aged or infirm parent or a daughter who is unmarried extends insofar as the parent or the unmarried daughter, as the case may be, is unable to maintain himself or herself out of his or her own earnings or other property. Explanation.-In this section “parent” includes a childless step-mother. 5. Going by Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, we find that, as per the said provision; a Hindu is bound, during his or her lifetime, to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and his or her aged or infirm parents. In short, the children and 'parents' are entitled to get maintenance allowance from their parents children respectively, if they satisfy the other requirements. The word 'parent' is not defined in the Act. But, the explanation to Section 20 of the Act says that “parent” includes a childless stepmother. 6. Then the questions that emerge for consideration are thus, (1) Whether the stepmother, who has a child of her own is entitled to get maintenance allowance from the children of her husband in another marriage? (2) What is the effect and impact of the inclusion of a particular species from a family or group by an explanation to a definition? (3) Does the inclusion of a particular species from a family or group by an explanation to a definition exclude all other species of that family or group, from that definition? 7. Since the word 'parent' is not defined in the Act, at first, let us look at the dictionary meaning of the word 'parent' for construing Section 20 of the Act. According to Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, 'parent' means father or mother of a person. Then, let us have a look at the dictionary meaning of the word 'stepmother' also. According to the Oxford English dictionary 'stepmother' means the woman who has married to your father, when your parents are divorced or your mother is dead. According to Cambridge Advanced Learner's dictionary, stepmother is the women who is married to someone's father but who is not their real mother. Thus, it is very clear that stepmother is not a 'parent'. According to the Oxford English dictionary 'stepmother' means the woman who has married to your father, when your parents are divorced or your mother is dead. According to Cambridge Advanced Learner's dictionary, stepmother is the women who is married to someone's father but who is not their real mother. Thus, it is very clear that stepmother is not a 'parent'. But, the legislature consciously included 'childless stepmother' also within the definition of parent. Obviously, a stepmother, having no child alone shall be deemed to be a parent and it follows that a stepmother having child shall not be deemed to be a parent. If that be so, stepmother having child is not entitled to get maintenance allowance under Section 20 of the Act. 8. Coming to the question Nos.2 and 3, the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that merely on the inclusion of 'childless stepmother', in the expression 'parent', it cannot be held that stepmother having child, is excluded from or not included in the expression 'parent'. 9. We are unable to accept the said argument, in view of a reasonable as well as sensible interpretation, that can be given to an 'inclusion' in the explanation. We are of the view that, when a particular species only from a genus is included in a definition or explanation, it is just and reasonable to interpret, in such a way that all other species in that genus is implicitly excluded in that definition or explanation; otherwise, that genus itself would have been included in the definition, instead of electing that particular species. Inclusion of a particular species amounts to implicit exclusion of all others in that genus. Stepmother is a genus, which includes two species, the childless stepmother and stepmother having child. When the childless stepmother alone is included in the explanation to the expression 'parent', it is implied that the stepmother having child is excluded from the expression 'parent'. Hence, in the above view, we reject the said argument. 10. In view of the above interpretation, we find that the stepmother who has a child is not entitled to get maintenance allowance from the children of her husband in another marriage. 11. Coming to the next finding, it is the case of the respondent that the petitioner has a daughter, by name Baby. The said allegation has not been disputed by the petitioner. 11. Coming to the next finding, it is the case of the respondent that the petitioner has a daughter, by name Baby. The said allegation has not been disputed by the petitioner. Thus, admittedly, the petitioner has a child. In that view, the petitioner will not come under the inclusive definition of 'parent'. That apart, as per the Registered will executed by the deceased husband of the petitioner, she has got life estate in the property. As rightly observed by the family court, the intention of the testator was to enjoy the property by the petitioner till her life time. In the above analysis, the family court is fully justified in rejecting the claim for maintenance allowance raised by the petitioner. There is no illegality or impropriety in the findings, whereby the family court rejected the claim for maintenance. Hence this original petition would stand dismissed.