MANOJ KAPADIA Vs. MANISHA KAPADIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the order dated 12.03.2008, passed in MJC No.410/2004, by the learned Family Court, Bhopal, granting maintenance of Rs.2,000/ - per month to the respondent No.01.

(2.) The case of the respondents before the learned Family Court was that the marriage of the applicant and respondent No.01 was solemnized on 23.02.2000 as per Hindu rites and rituals and due to this wedlock respondent No.02 was born. After birth of respondent No.02, the applicant and his relatives started dowry demand and to fulfill this demand they have committed cruelty against the respondent No.01. Members of the Society and other relatives interfered in the matter, but, the behavior of the applicant never changed and ultimately he left the respondents and shifted to Burhanpur. On these series of facts respondents filed an application for maintenance before learned Family Court because the respondent No.01 was not having any source of income for the livelihood of the respondent No.01 and her son. The applicant being the Unani doctor, having source of income of Rs.12,000/ - per month without having any responsibility.

(3.) The applicant appeared before the Court with the reply that the respondent No.01 never lived with him and after one day only she came to Bhopal with her brother. When the applicant went at her parental home she refused to come with him. Meanwhile the applicant shifted to Surat and tried his level best to live together, but all the efforts turned futile. Matter was resolved on the basis that the applicant will settle at Bhopal where the parents of the respondent No.01 resides but her behavior does not change during stay at Bhopal. The respondent No.01 impose many more conditions, which cannot be complied with. Even then the applicant tolerated all misbehavior of the respondent No.01. Sometimes he found some pieces of cigarettes and also found empty liquor bottles in the room of the respondent No.01. When he inquired with the respondent No.01 she failed to give satisfactory reply. Due to all these situations the applicant was not having any mental or physical relationship with the respondent No.01. The respondent No.01 became pregnant due to her adulterous life and the respondent No.02 is the outcome of this adultery, therefore, the applicant challenged the paternity of the respondent No.02 also. On these sets of facts the applicant denied the maintenance of the respondents.