SEKAR Vs. KALAISELVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ANIMADVERTING upon the order dated 30.11.2006, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sirkali, in M.C.No,7 of 2006, this revision is focussed.

(2.) SUCCINCTLY and pithily, the relevant facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision would run thus:

(3.) A plain reading of the order of the lower Court as well as the perusal of the records would reveal that the relationship among the parties is an admitted one. P.W.1 (R1) herein would depose that the husband indulged in wife battering and he went to the extent of hitting her with a club and she sustained damage of her eyes. Whereas, the husband would plead his innocence and he would state that he had not indulged in wife battering, but it was she who left the matrimonial home. In fact, he would even go to the extent of stating that it was the wife who attacked the husband. Absolutely the lower Court after considering the pro et contra, held that there was nothing to indicate and display that the wife disentitled herself from claiming maintenance.