PANEERSELVAM Vs. ABIRAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE brief facts of the case are as follows:- 1. The respondent herein / wife had filed a maintenance case in M.C.No.6 of 2008, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-I, Tindivanam, against the revision petitioner / husband and has claimed a monthly maintenance of a sum of Rs.3,000/-. The wife further stated that prior to marriage both had loved each other. Subsequently, the marriage was solemnized at "Arulmigu Srilakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple" on 24.09.2006 as per Hindu Customs and Rites. Prior to the marriage, both had sexual relationship. In the result, she had become pregnant and she gave birth to a male child. Her husband is a painter and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. She further stated that her husband had killed the child. Therefore, a criminal case had been registered on the file of Rosanai Police Station as Crime No.296 of 2007. The case is still pending. She further stated that her husband had deserted her and hence she has claimed maintenance against him as he is his legally wedded wife.

(2.) THE husband had filed counter statement and resisted the maintenance case. He admitted that both had loved each other and that subsequently the marriage was solemnized. He had further stated that his wife had levelled a false criminal case against him. The said false case is still pending. He further stated that prior to separation, he had provided all necessities required for his wife. He is not earning Rs.10,000/-, as a painter, as alleged. After marriage, his wife's brother and sister had tortured him and he had opposed them. Hence, the false case had been filed. His wife did not feed her breast milk to the child.

(3.) ON the side of the wife, she had been examined as P.W.1 and one Kasirajan had been examined as P.W.2. On the side of the wife, five documents had been marked, viz., Ex.P1-marriage receipt, Ex.P2-child birth certificate, Ex.P3-copy of the plaint filed before the District Munsif Court, Ex.P4-copy of the appeal of the Sub Court and Ex.P5-partition deed. On the side of the husband, the husband had been examined as R.W.1 and no document was marked.