C. SELVARAJ Vs. CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner/Husband has preferred the instant Criminal Revision Petition as against the order dated 12/10/2010 in M.C.No.3 of 2009 passed by the Learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur.

(2.) THE Learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur, while passing the orders in M.C.No.3 of 2009 on 12/10/2010 has among other things observed that "the Respondent (Revision Petitioner/Husband) has means to pay the maintenance sum of Rs.1,000.00 p.m., to the First Respondent/Wife and also opined that the Second Petitioner (Son - College Student) is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.1,000.00 p.m., as maintenance from the Revision Petitioner/Respondent (Father), till he attains majority and also awarded a sum of Rs.1,000.00 to the Third Petitioner (Third Respondent/Minor Daughter) and the said amount has been directed to be paid on or before 5th day of every English Calendar Month and dispose of the matter.

(3.) ACCORDING to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Husband, the impugned order of the trial Court in M.C.No.3 of 2009 dated 12/10/2010 directing the Revision Petitioner to pay the monthly maintenance of Rs.1,000.00 to the Respondents 1 to 3 is an illegal and erroneous one, for the simple reason that the Respondents 1 to 3 are maintaining themselves for the past ten years till the date of filing of the Petition claiming maintenance, but this crucial aspect of the matter has not been borne in mind by the trial Court at the time of passing the impugned order in question.