RAJAMANICKAM Vs. JEEVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent in M. C. No. 16 of 2002 is the revision petitioner herein. M. C. No. 16 of 2002 was filed before the Family Court, Coimbatore, by the petitioners under Section 125 of Cr. P. C. , for maintenance. According to the first petitioner, she is the wife of the respondent and the second petitioner is the daughter of the first petitioner and the respondent.

(2.) THE averments in the petition filed by the petitioners is that on 8. 11. 2000 the marriage between the first petitioner/wife and the respondent/husband was solemnized as per the Christian custom and that at the time of marriage the first petitioner's parents have presented 12 soverigns of god ornaments besides Rs. 10,000/- cash and that the first petitioner and the respondent lived happily for nearly two months and thereafter there arose a misunderstanding between the first petitioner and the respondent on the eve of Christmas the sister of the respondent insisted the first petitioner's parents to present a gold ring to her brother/respondent and since the parents of the first petitioner were not in a position to present a gold ring to the respondent, the respondent began to ill-treat the first petitioner and that the respondent also addicted to drinks and used to beat the first petitioner often and has also failed to maintain the petitioners which made the first petitioner to go out of the matrimonial home on 23. 2. 2001 to her sisters house at Erode and there was a punchayat took place at Erode. But the respondent has failed to abide by the decision taken in the panchayat. Through phone the respondent has demanded Rs. 10,000/- towards additional dowry. THE frist petitioner had issued notice on 4. 4. 2000, which was received by the respondent. THEreafter, the respondent came for settlement and agreed to set a separate home at Door No. 10, Santhan Street, Kurampatti Post, Erode, and at that time the first petitioner had brought cot, bureau, washing machine and other house hold articles from her parent's house. Even thereafter, the respondent had not changed his attitude. He used to come at late hours to the house and used to beat the petitioners. THE first petitioner came to her parents'house for delivery. Even after the delivery the respondent had never cared to see her and the child. Even for the letter written by the first petitioner dated 4. 11. 2000 the respondent has not chosen to send any reply. THE respondent is working as a lab technician at Chittode hospital run by Dr. Sengodan and he is getting Rs. 5,000/- per month towards his salary. So towards the maintenance the first petitioner has claimed rs. 2000/- for month and the second petitioner has claimed Rs. 1,000/- per month.

(3.) AFTER going through the evidence both oral and documentary the learned trial judge has dismissed the claim of the first petitioner, but allowed the claim of the second petitioner by awarding rs. 1,000/- towards the maintenance per month from the date of the petition, which is being challenged by the respondent/husband (in M. C. No. 16 of 2002), before this Court.