MONDI AMMANNA Vs. MONDI APPEYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision directed against the order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Srikakulam in Crl. Revision Petition No. 74/94, dated 4-8-1995. The revision petitioner is the wife and the 1st respondent is the husband. For the sake of convenience, they are referred to hereinafter, as wife and husband.

(2.) The facts in brief, leading for filing of this revision are as follows : The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the 1st respondent and they have got a minor son. They lived happily for some time. As disputes arose, the wife has been living separately along with her minor son. The husband filed O.P. No. 48/77 on the file of the Addl. Sub-Judge, Srikakulam for restitution of rights. The wife, along with her son, filed O.S. No. 104/78 on the file of the Addl. Sub-Judge, Srikakulam for maintenance. Both the matters were tried together and they were disposed of on 29-9-1979. O.P. No. 48/77 filed by the husband was allowed and the wife was directed to join her husband. O.S. No. 104/78 was partly decreed. The claim of the wife for maintenance was rejected, but the claim of the minor son for maintenance was allowed and a sum of Rs. 50.00 per month was granted. The wife preferred an appeal in A.S. No. 50/80 against the said dismissal of her claim for maintenance and the appeal was also dismissed by the learned Addl. district and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam. For recovery of arrears of maintenance E.P. No. 4/82 was filed by the minor son and an extent of 40 cents of land belonging to the husband was sold in auction for realising the said arrears of maintenance. As the wife refused to comply with the directions in O.P. No. 48/77 in joining her husband, the husband filed O.P. No. 4/81 on the file of the Addl. Subordinate Judge, Srikakulam for granting a decree of divorce, and it was allowed on 30-9-1982 and a decree of divorce was granted. In 1989, the wife filed M.C. No. 7/89 under Section 125, Cr.P.C. for granting maintenance in the Court of Munsiff Magistrate, Tekkali, Srikakulam District, as a divorced wife against her former husband alleging that she has no means to live, that her former husband failed to maintain though having sufficient means, that he had married one Jayalakshmi subsequent to the divorce and that she has no re-married after divorce. The husband resisted that application alleging that subsequent to the decree of divorce granted on 30-2-1982, he is not under obligation to maintain her, that she failed to obey the directions of the Court in O.P. No. 48/77 and therefore, divorce has been ordered, that the marriage between them is no longer subsisting, that the competent civil Court refused to grant maintenance and that the said order has become final, that the wife is not entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. when the same was disallowed by a competent civil Court.

(3.) To substantiate their respective contentions, the wife examined PWs. 1 to 3 and marked Exs. A-1 and A-2 on her behalf and the husband himself got examined as RW-1 and marked Exs. D-1 to D-7. On a consideration of the oral and documentary evidence placed before him, the learned Magistrate held that as a divorced wife, she is entitled for maintenance and directed the husband to pay maintenance at Rs. 200.00 per month from the date of his order i.e. 7-7-1994. The learned Magistrate also held that the husband got sufficient means to pay the maintenance at that rate to the wife. Aggrieved of that order, the husband preferred revision in Crl. Revision Petition No. 74/94 to the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Srikakulam by his order dated 4-8-1995 allowed that revision petition and set aside the order of the learned Magistrate granting maintenance to the wife by holding that she is not entitled for maintenance as a divorcee, as her claim for maintenance was rejected by a competent Civil Court and that the order of the civil Court has become final. Aggrieved of that order, the wife has preferred this revision.