(1.) THESE two cases arise out of the same order. They, being connected, are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order. Criminal Revision No. 178/91 shall be the leading case.
(2.) FACTS of the case are that non-petitioner Pramod Kumar Agrawal is the husband of petitioner Smt. Chandraprabha Devi and Kumari Jyoti is their daughter. A petition was moved for maintenance before the Magistrate. After examining the evidence on record the petition was allowed and the non-petitioner Kumari Jyoti was granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 250/- per month from the date of order.
(3.) A revision was filed against that order and the Revisional Court by the impugned order dated 5. 8. 1991 modified the order of the learned Magistrate and Rs. 150/- per month was allowed as maintenance for the daughter Kumar Jyoti. The wife Smt. Chandraprabha Devi was herself earning, being a nurse in Govt. hospital. The Revisional Court however directed that the maintenance shall be paid from the date of the application.