RAJESH Vs. BABY GIRIJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition is filed by the respondent in M.C.No.326 of 2013 on the file of the Family Court, Palakkad. Under challenge is the order dated 11.5.2016 by which the petition filed by his wife under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was allowed and the petitioner was directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per mensem from the date of filing of the petition.

(2.) In the petition filed before the court below, the respondent had contended that her marriage with the petitioner was solemnized on 29.1.2012. It was the second marriage of the petitioner. His former wife had expired leaving behind two daughters. The elder daughter was studying in the 11th standard and the younger one in the 5th standard. The parents of the petitioner had given 25 sovereigns of gold at the time of marriage. A few months into the marriage, the petitioner and his mother started harassing the respondent and she was told that her parents had not given enough gold ornaments. The petitioner is financially well off than the respondent. Her gold ornaments were taken away and it came to light in course of time , that he was maintaining relationship with other women. On 20.3.2013, the respondent was assaulted and she was forced to go back to her parental home. Later, mediation was conducted and she returned back to the petitioner and started residing with him. According to the respondent, ill-treatment continued. An attempt was made to bring another lady to their house. When the petitioner stood in the way, she was sent out from the matrimonial home. On 3.6.2013, she left the petitioner and started living with her parents. She is unable to maintain herself. On the other hand, the petitioner is a successful businessman and is the dealer of AVT products. He is running a business in the name and style as 'Aparna Enterprises' and earns not less than Rs.One lakh per mensem. In the petition, she prayed that she be granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per mensem.

(3.) The petitioner entered appearance and filed objection countering the contentions of the petitioner. He denied that he had ill-treated the respondent. According to the petitioner, the respondent is a lesbian and she was not interested in having a sexual relationship with him. On the other hand, he has reason to suspect that the respondent had made advances towards his daughters. He denied that he was having relationship with other women. It was specifically contended that the respondent is a educated person who initially had worked as a nursing assistant at the K.G. Hospital. Later, she worked for a short while as a receptionist at Tirupur and has thereafter worked as a nursing assistant at Ahalya hospital. He denied that he was running a dealership of AVT products and also denied that he was earning in excess of Rs.One lakh per mensem. According to him, he was only lending coffee machines to others and using the said meager income he has to look after his aged parents.