ANAND G HINDU Vs. CHITRA R

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein was the respondent in M.C.No.17 of 2015 on the files of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Thiruvananthapuram. The respondent instituted the said proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. M.C.No.17 of 2015 was allowed on 19.11.2019 granting to the respondent, among others, maintenance at the rate of Rs.12,500/- per month. The petitioner challenged the order in M.C.No.17 of 2015, in Crl.A.231 of 2019. In the appeal, in terms of Ext.P1 order, though the appellate court stayed the order granting maintenance to the respondent initially, the said order was later modified in terms of Ext.P2 order, directing the petitioner to pay 50% of the maintenance ordered and directing the petitioner to deposit the arrears within 30 days. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P2 order.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the respondent is a person well employed and having sufficient means to maintain herself and such a person is not entitled to maintenance in a proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act. According to the learned counsel, Ext.P2 order, in the circumstances, is unsustainable in law.