BHOORABAI Vs. BHAULAL S O MATTU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this revision application one Bhoorabai w/o Bhaulal has challenged the order passed by the Second Extra Assistant Judge, Aurangabad (in fact it should be Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad), allowing respondent No. 1 husbands revision application and setting aside the order of maintenance granting maintenance of Rs. 50/- per month passed in favour of the petitioner by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gangapur.

(2.) The petitioner wife had filed an application for maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the respondent husband in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gangapur, on 10th September, 1974. The averments in that application were that the petitioner was married to the respondent husband in the year 1968 at Apegaon, Taluka Gangapur and resided with the respondent husband. Two years prior to the date of the application, it is alleged, at the instigation of the father and the other members of the family the respondent husband behaved her (it should be treated) with cruelty and they demanded money from the mother of the petitioner wife who was unable to fulfil their demand. The ill-treatment to the petitioner started on account of several reasons including the inability of the petitioner parents to pay the money and gold ornaments to the father of the respondent husband. The petitioner was driven out by the respondent husband from his house in the month of October 1973 and since then she had been residing with her parents. The further averment in the application was that the respondent husband refused to provide clothes and meals. It was further averred that as the petitioner had no source of income for her maintenance and as the respondent husband was well-to-do person and was member of the joint family which possessed more than 60 acres of both irrigated and non-irrigated land at village Apegaon the income from which was Rs. 50,000/- per year, the petitioner was entitled to claim Rs. 500/- per month as a maintenance amount.

(3.) When this application was heard initially, the respondent contested the same and stated that there was no question of ill-treatment on his side. He was always ready and willing to maintain her. The respondent also stated that the mother of the petitioner wife had taken a loan of Rs. 500/- in cash and some gold and silver ornaments for her sons ( i.e., petitioners brother) marriage from the father of the respondent husband and since the petitioners (wifes) mother had refused to return either the gold and silver ornaments or the amount of Rs. 500/-, the father of the respondent husband had refused to send the petitioner to her parents. However, in the month of October 1973, the parents of the wife as well as some villagers came to his house and forcibly took the petitioners to her parents house. It was averred that the allegations made in the applications were false and baseless and, therefore, deserves to be dismissed.