NARENDRA VERMA Vs. VANDANA VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. Smt. Vandana Verma respondent No. 1 is the legally wedded wife of Narendra Verma revisionist. Nuptial naught between two was solemnized according to Hindu customs and rites on 1-5-2001 at District Jhansi. Rs. 2 lakhs and many other ornaments were given in the marriage but the revisionist Narendra Verma and his family members started demanding Rs. two lakhs more. Because of the non-fulfillment of the said demand wife Vandana Verma was tortured and was even assaulted. She was ultimately turned out of her in-law house and her welfare was not cared thereafter by her husband and therefore, left with no option she filed an application for maintenance before the Principal Judge, Family Court Jhansi, which was registered as Case No. 209/02 Vandana Verma v. Narendra Verma, under Section 125 Cr. P. C. , P. S. Kotwali, District Jhansi. The grounds were that she was unable to maintain herself when her husband Narendra Verma the revisionist has got a jewelry shop and his income is around Rs. 15,000/- per month. Wife respondent No. 2 claimed Rs. 5,000/- as maintenance from her husband.

(2.) NARENDRA Verma revisionist was noticed and he filed a written objection denying the allegations regarding the demand of dowry etc. and pleaded that respondent wife was coercing him to get the house of his father partitioned and that he should live with her in District Jhansi for which the revisionist, who was resident of District Allahabad, was no agreeable. It was further pleaded by the husband that in the month of December 2001 Rs. 40,000/- were taken as loan by the father of respondent wife from the father of the revisionist husband and the same was not paid. It was further averred that in the month of January 2002 respondent wife left the in-laws hence and alongwith her cloths, ornaments and Rs. 7,000/- cash and came back to her maternal home. It was also averred that husband had filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution conjugal rights being Application No. 472/02 against the wife. It was also averred by the husband that he is unemployed and respondent wife earns about Rs. 2,000/- from tailoring business. With the aforesaid claim it was prayed that the application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr. P. C. filed by the wife be dismissed.

(3.) PRINCIPAL Judge Family Court Jhansi after critically appreciating the evidence led by both sides and looking into merits of the matter allowed the application of the respondent wife for maintenance vide his impugned order dated 31-8- 2006 and directed the revisionist to pay Rs. 1,000/- as maintenance from the date of the judgment 31-8-2006 on or before 10th day of every succeeding month.