AMUTHAVALLI Vs. PANDIYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Court below allowing the revision petition filed by the respondent and thereby, setting aside the order of the trial Court which granted maintenance in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. The petitioner filed a maintenance petition under sec. 125 of Cr.P.C , 1973claiming for monthly maintenance from the respondent. The respondent primarily took the defence of adultery against the petitioner on the ground that she is living with one Govindan and therefore, she is not entitled to claim maintenance. The trial Court on appreciation of the entire materials placed before it, came to a conclusion that the adulterous life alleged to have been lead by the petitioner has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt and therefore, thought it fit to fix a monthly maintenance of a sum of Rs.5000.00 by the respondent.

(3.) The respondent husband aggrieved by the said order, filed C.R.P No.40 of 2015 before the Principal Sessions Judge, Salem. The revision Court after analysing the entire materials available on record allowed the revision petition mainly on the ground that the preponderance of probabilities establishes the fact that the petitioner is living in adultery with one Govindan and therefore, she is not entitled to claim maintenance from the respondent.