LAWS(MAD)-2019-2-234

C.VAIYAPURI Vs. RAJATHI

Decided On February 27, 2019
C.Vaiyapuri Appellant
V/S
RAJATHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Mettur in M.C.No.1 of 2013, dated 15.4.2012, allowing the petition filed by the respondent under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and directing the petitioner to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.3,000/- to the respondent and also arrears from the date of petition.

(2.) The respondent has filed M.C.No.1 of 2013 alleging that the marriage between herself and the petitioner was solemnized on 02.07.2009 in Siththar Koil at Elampillai as per their customs. After the marriage, they lived as husband and wife at Salem Steel Plant quarters for 10 days. While living as husband and wife, the petitioner treated the respondent cruelly and also tortured her and sent her out of the matrimonial home. After coming to the parental home, the respondent convened panchayats for reunion, however, the petitioner has not cared to take back the respondent. As dutiful husband, the petitioner is bound to pay maintenance to the respondent and the petitioner neglected to maintain her. On 12.12.2011, the respondent sent a legal notice to the petitioner by marking a copy to the higher officials of the petitioner. Despite receipt of the notice, the respondent has not given any reply. On 15.2.2012, the respondent lodged a police complaint before All Women Police Station, Omalur. The parents of the respondent were not able to maintain the respondent. The petitioner was working as Senior Technician in Salem Steel Plant and was receiving salary of Rs.1 lakh per month. Further, he was getting agricultural income of Rs.10 lakhs from his agricultural lands. Hence, the respondent prayed for monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/-.

(3.) Resisting the petition, the petitioner filed counter stating that he was previously married one lady, which marriage ended in divorce in the year 2008 and thereafter, he was on the look out for another bride to get remarried and came across the respondent through the pressure of one Govindan, who was a marriage broker. But after enquiry, the petitioner came to know that the respondent was previously married and had a 6 years old daughter through the previous marriage and due to torture of the respondent and her family members, her previous husband committed suicide by consuming poison in front of their house. It is stated that the respondent through the marriage broker and his friends threatened the petitioner with dire consequences and the petitioner refused to marry the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent filed a false police complaint before the All Women Police Station, Omalur and after an enquiry, the Inspector of Police had not registered the FIR. It is further stated that since all her extortion attempts failed, the respondent has filed the petition seeking maintenance. It is stated that when the petitioner denied the marriage with the respondent, the petition for maintenance filed by the respondent is not maintainable and prayed for dismissal of the same.