PATEL VIJAYKUMAR HIRALAL Vs. PATEL GEETABEN VIJAYKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS common question of law and facts arise in both these Criminal Revision Applications and as such both these Revision Applications are cross Revision Applications challenging the very common judgment and order, both these revision applications are heard, decided and disposed of by this common order.

(2.) CRIMINAL Revision Application no. 138 of 2009 has been preferred by the petitioner hereinoriginal opponenthusband to quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No.4, Ahmedabad dated 15.12.2008 in Miscellaneous Application No.46 of 2002, by which, learned Judge has directed the petitioner hereinoriginal opponent husband to pay Rs.3000/ per month to the respondent no.1 herein original applicant wife towards her maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure from the date of application i.e. 4.1.2002.

(3.) THAT the petitioner of Criminal Revision Application No.401 of 2009 original applicantwife submitted the application before the learned Family Court, Ahmedabad for getting the maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That the original applicantwife claimed Rs.5000/ towards her maintenance submitting that she has been deserted by the husband without reasonable cause. It was also submitted that the husband has agriculture lands and earning Rs.12000/ per month from the same. It was also submitted that the husband is also earning Rs.3500/ per month from doing some other work. Therefore, it was requested to award Rs.5000/ per month towards maintenance.