PRAKASH Vs. SHASHIKALA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is filed calling in question the order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raichur in Crl. Mis. No. 91/2013 directing the petitioner herein to pay maintenance of Rs. 4,000/ - to the petitioner No. 1 and Rs. 2,000/ - per month to the petitioner No. 2 from the date of the petition.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Smt. Hema L. Kulkarni, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Sri Sudhir Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri R.V. Nadagouda for respondent No. 1 and I have also carefully perused the records.

(3.) THE first petitions Shashikala claiming to be the wife of respondent Prakash contended that the respondent has neglected and refused to maintain her and therefore, she appears to have filed a case in Crl. Misc. No. 100/2006 before the Trial Court. Earlier, it appears, there was a compromise between the parties. By virtue of the same, petitioners went to the matrimonial home and consequently, the said petition was dismissed on 29.11.2006 as not pressed. Thereafter, it appears, they lived happily for about one month. During the said period, the petitioner No. 1 gave birth to petitioner No. 2. The relationship between petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 with the respondent are also not in dispute. Thereafter, the respondent started ill -treating and harassing the petitioner and therefore the petitioner filed Crl. Misc. No. 48/2011 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raichur. Due to conciliation once again before the Court, the parties have joined together. Upto 2013, it appears, they lived ignoring differences and difficulties. But ultimately, the matrimonial tie has been broken and consequently, the petitioners stayed in the house of her parents.