MUKESH TELI Vs. BHARTI TELI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision petition is directed against the order, dated 27-6-2005, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, in LA. No. 1486 of 2004 in O.P. No. 902 of 2004. Both the learned counsel agreed for the disposal of the revision petition at the stage of admission itself and accordingly the revision petition is being disposed of.

(2.) The revision petitioner is the respondent in the interlocutory application filed in LA. No. 1486 of 2004 by the respondents herein seeking interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 53,200/- per month pending disposal pf O.P. No. 902 of 2004, filed by the respondents seeking maintenance, on the file of the Family Court, Hyderabad. The first respondent is the wife and respondents 2 and 3 are their daughter and son respectively. The marriage of the petitioner with the first respondent was solemnized on 31-12-1983. Out of the lawful wedlock, respondents 2 and 3 were born to them. On the premise that the respondents were neglected by the revision petitioner and harassment was meted out to them at his hands, they filed the main petition seeking maintenance at the rate of Rs. 53,200/- per month, the break up of which had been given inter alia in the petition which includes the expenses for maintaining house and for other day-today expenses like food, clothing, etc. in an amount of Rs. 25,000/-, medical expenses at Rs. 4,200/-, education expenses for each of the respondents 2 and 3 at Rs. 10,000/- and hostel and miscellaneous expenses for petitioner No. 3 at Rs. 4,000/-, aggregating to Rs. 53,200/-. Accompanying the petition, they filed interim application, as aforesaid, seeking interim maintenance at the same rate. That application was resisted by the revision petitioner. The case of the respondent appears to be that the first respondent has also been earning equally. He was driven out of the flat by his wife and got him arrested by the Police by launching a false case, on account of which, his business has gone down and suffered losses. If the respondents 2 and 3 are willing,they can stay with the father, and since his wife is also equally earning she must share the burden.

(3.) At the time of the enquiry, Exs. P1 to P 65, on the side of the petitioners/claimants and Exs. R1 to R16, on the side of the revision petitioner were got marked. After having heard either side and considering the documents filed on either side, under the impugned order, the Court below directed the revision petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 15,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the respondents 1 to 3 from the date of petition. Having been aggrieved by the said order, the revision petitioner is now assailing the same, as aforelsaid.