KHANDU MADHU KADBHANE Vs. SITABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above two petitions are filed against the judgment and order dated 22nd October, 1993 delivered by the Sessions Judge, Nasik in Criminal Revision Application No. 252 of 1992 whereby husbands revision application was partly allowed and the amount of monthly maintenance of Rs. 500/- granted by the J. M. F. C. Igatpuri in favour of the wife was reduced to Rs. 200/- per month.

(2.) THESE petitions arise in the following circumstances : the petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 1375/93 is the husband who had obtained a decree of divorce against respondent No. 1 wife Sitabai in the year 1963. Before obtaining the decree of divorce the husband had obtained a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against the wife. Since the wife had not complied with the said decree, the husband obtained a decree of divorce. Wife filed application for maintenance under section 125 of Cri. P. C. in the year 1991 by filing Misc. Petition No. 138 of 1991 in the Court of J. M. F. C. , Igatpuri. The defence of the husband was that since he had obtained initially decree for restitution of conjugal right and thereafter divorce on the ground of desertion of the wife, the wife is not entitled for maintenance. The trial Court allowed the application by judgment and order dated 18-7-1992 and the husband was directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month to the wife from the date of application. That order was challenged by the husband in the Criminal Revision Application No. 252 of 1992 in the Sessions Court, Nasik which was partly allowed. Against the said order the present two separate petitions have been filed by the husband and wife.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner-husband the wife is not entitled for maintenance at all she being a defaulting party. The wife has challenged the order of the Sessions Court reducing the amount of maintenance from Rs. 500/- p. m. to Rs. 200/- p. m. which was originally granted to her by the trial Court. Since both the petitions arise from the common judgment and order of the Sessions Court, Nasik, both are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.