YAMINI MISHRA Vs. RISHI MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been directed against the order dated 21.11.2011 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior in Cr.M.J.C.No.423/2010, whereby the Family Court has fixed monthly maintenance of Rs.1200/- per month payable to the present applicant by the respondent. The applicant is aggrieved by the insufficiency of the maintenance amount fixed by the court below.

(2.) The facts leading to filing of the present case are that the marriage was solemnized between the applicant and the respondent on 23.11.2008 as per Hindu rituals and customs. According to the applicant, the respondent and his family members were persistently making demand of dowry and harassed the applicant for non-fulfillment of the same. The respondent is living with another woman named Jyoti Chaudhary and under compelling circumstances, the applicant was forced to live in her parental house. After that, she made a complaint against the respondent and his family members on 05.05.2010, on the basis of that complaint, an F.I.R. under Sections 498, 506B, IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was registered against them. She is unable to maintain herself and she does not have any source of income, therefore, she is depending on her brother and sister whereas the respondent is working as an Area Manager in Grandix Pharmaceuticals Company Limited and he is earning Rs.20,000/- per month. Accordingly, a prayer was made for a direction to the respondent to pay Rs.5,000/- per month as maintenance to the applicant. The respondent did not appear before the court below after service of notice, therefore, ex-parte proceedings were directed against him.

(3.) The trial court after considering the evidence recorded by the applicant held that the applicant fails to prove that the respondent is earning Rs.20,000/- per month. Looking to the present minimum wages, if it is presumed that the earning of the respondent to be Rs.30,000/-, the conclusion by the court below by fixing the maintenance of Rs.1200/- is insufficient, whereas the applicant has submitted the income certificate of the respondent to show that he is earning Rs.34,000/- per month, but the trial Court has ignored this fact. The court below without assigning any reason has shifted the liability for payment of maintenance from the date of order. While the application was filed before the Court below on 16.11.2010. So one year maintenance has also been discarded by the trial court without assigning any reasons. Therefore, the order of the court below deserves to be modified.