N SUJATHA Vs. K NAGARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner/wife has preferred the revision aggrieved against the dismissal of M. C. No. 33 of 1995 by the learned Family Judge, Coimbatore dated 9-7-1997.

(2.) The case in brief is as follows : The petitioner filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the respondent claiming maintenance. It is the case of the petitioner that her marriage with the respondent took place on 16-4-1992 in the presence of relations and friends at "Sakthi Vinayagar Temple" at Coimbatore Collectorate. According to her, both of them were lovers prior to the marriage and with the consent of both families, the marriage was performed. After the marriage she lived in the house of the respondent for 30 days and on 20-5-1992, without any reason, she was ill-treated and sent out of the house and as such, she is now residing with her parents. She has to income to maintain herself. The respondent is employed in the transport Corporation. There is already another criminal case in CC No. 711 of 1992 between the parties. She was ill-treated by the respondent as well as his men. She was subsequently beaten up and "Thali was also snatched and driven out of the house. The respondent had relationship with other women and the petitioner came to know about it only later. In May 1992 at Kamarajapuram a panchayat was also conducted and the respondent agreed to take her back, but did not comply with the same. He is drawing a salary of Rs.2500/- per month and also doing cloth business and earing about Rs.2500/- per month. He has got own house.

(3.) The respondent opposed the application and denied the marriage. There was no marriage between the parties on 16-4-1992. The time of marriage has not been specifically stated by the petitioner. He also denied that they were lovers and other allegations made by her relating to the harassment. He never tied "Thali" or snatched the same at a later point of time. She had left the home on her own accord after writing a letter that she did not want to live with him. She is employed in the Home Guard and also doing tailoring work and earning sufficient income and as such, she can maintain herself. She gave a complaint before R. S. Puram Police Station and the police only compelled him to live with the petitioner and everything was arranged only by the petitioner and her son. Photographs were also taken in the police station on compulsion by the police. There is no legal marriage between the parties and as such she is not a legally wedded wife entitled to claim maintenance. He has two sisters and also a brother and he has to take care all of them.