KUNDAN KUMAR Vs. GAYATRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C has been filed by the petitioner/husband Kundan Kumar against his wife and child being aggrieved by the upholding of the order passed by the trial Court granting maintenance of Rs.1500/ - jointly to both the respondents. The trial Court had awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/ - to the wife and Rs.300/ - to the child and when the respondent/wife had filed a revision before the revisional Court bearing No.327/09, the revisional Court while maintaining the maintenance amount awarded to wife enhanced the amount of maintenance awarded to the child from Rs.300/ - to Rs.500/ -.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently urged the fact that both the orders of the Courts below were contrary to the facts on record. The petitioner is a poor person earning only Rs.900/ - per month from a business man running tent house which has been totally disregarded by the trial Court as well as the revisional Court. There is not an iota of evidence on record to show that the applicant is earning more than Rs.900/ -. Besides, one child out of the wedlock is being looked after by the petitioner along with his old mother and the petitioner cannot afford to pay the maintenance amount of Rs.1500/ -.

(3.) Per contra, Counsel for the respondents, has fully supported both the orders passed by the Courts below and submitted that they were in accordance with the provisions of law and based on proper appreciation of evidence. Counsel stated that in para -16 of the impugned judgment the revisional Court has categorically held that even according to the Minimum Wages Act the petitioner could not have earned Rs.900/ - per month since he is a fully abled person and even Rs.l00/ - per day is calculated, the petitioner must be at least earning Rs.3000/ - per month and has correctly awarded Rs.1000/ - to the respondent/wife and Rs.500/ - to the child looking to the current inflation rate. He, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the petition.