GANDHAKURI CHINNA Vs. GANDHAKURI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is filed to set aside the order, dated 16.2.2009 passed in M.C.No.130 of 2008 on the file of the Court of Judge, Family Court, East Godavari District at Rajahmundry, whereby, 1st respondent being the wife and respondents 2 and 3 being the children of the revision petitioner were awarded maintenance of Rs.1,000/- each in M.C.No.130 of 2008.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the revision petitioner and the 1st respondent was performed on 24.5.2001 at Annavaram and their marriage has been consummated. Out of their wedlock, they were blessed with two sons i.e., respondents 2 and 3. They lead happy marital life for some time. Subsequently, revision petitioner started harassing the 1st respondent both physically and mentally by demanding additional dowry of Rs.50,000/-. It is also stated by the 1st respondent that the revision petitioner used to abuse her in filthy language and insulted her by treating her as servant maid. She further stated that even, he has not provided food properly to the respondents 1 to 3. In spite of repeated mediations, the petitioner did not stop his harassment. Finally, he necked out them from the matrimonial home. As there is no other go, 1st respondent along with her children reached her parents house and started residing along with her parents. As they are unable to maintain themselves, they filed the above said maintenance case under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') before the trial Court claiming maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month each from the revision petitioner alleging that they were neglected by the revision petitioner and they have no means to maintain themselves. The respondent is having a lorry, besides a daba house at Prathipadu village and getting income of Rs.1,000/- per day.

(3.) The revision petitioner herein contested the said maintenance case by filing counter and contended that the 1st respondent voluntarily deserted the matrimonial home without any reason, as such, she is not entitled for any maintenance. He also pointed that the 1st respondent insisted him to set up a separate family and when he refused her request, she used to ill-treat him and finally, on 3.3.2008 without any cause, 1st respondent left the company of the revision petitioner along with respondents 2 and 3. He further contended that the 1st respondent is working as Anganwadi teacher and earning a sum of Rs.1,500/- per month. The learned trial Judge after going through the entire material on record granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month each to the respondents 1 to 3.