M KRISHNA MOORTHY Vs. PUSHPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 20.1.2006, passed by the Family Court, Coimbatore in M.C.No,4 of 2004.)Challenging and impugning the order dated 20.1.2006, passed by the Family Court, Coimbatore, in M.C.No,4 of 2004, this criminal revision case is focussed.

(2.) THE gist and kernal, the pith and marrow of the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this criminal revision case would run thus:-THE respondent herein preferred the M.C.No,4 of 2004, before the Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore, seeking maintenance as against her husband-the revision petitioner herein, who filed H.M.O.P.No,463 of 2003, before the Family Court, Coimbatore, seeking divorce. THE learned Family Court Judge conducted a joint trial and dismissed the H.M.O.P and awarded maintenance in a sum of Rs.1000/- payable by the husband in favour of the wife. Being aggrieved by and dis-satisfied with the order of maintenance, this revision is focussed by the husband on various grounds, the nitty-gritty of them would run thus:-THE learned Judge failed to consider that it was the respondent, who deserted the revision petitioner and as such, she was not entitled to claim any maintenance. Ignoring the meagre monthly income of the revision petitioner herein, the Family Court Judge, awarded maintenance, which requires to be set aside.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the revision petitioner would set forth and put forth, highlight and spotlight the fact that the Family Court Judge simply ignored the owes of the revision petitioner, as he has been reeling under painful circumstances in life and he is responsible to maintain his widowed sister and another deserted sister and the non-cooperation on the part of the wife in adjusting with him in family life added fuel to the fire. It is also the contention of the revision petitioner that he is only a call-taxi driver, earning meagre sum of Rs.2000/- as per Ex.P6 and all these facts have not been considered by the Family Court Judge while awarding maintenance.