(1.) The petitioner-husband has filed this RPFAM assailing the Order dated 23.7.2008 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Criminal Proceeding No. 17 of 2003 directing him to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 700 to the opposite party-wife from the date of application, i.e. 8.1.2003. The facts leading to the present case are as follows:
(2.) On the above pleadings, the parties in support of their respective claims adduced oral evidence. The opposite party also adduced documentary evidence, viz., Death Certificate of the daughter, Rafanama, FIR, Certificate granted by Medical Officer, Derabis Primary Health Centre, order sheet in G.R. Case No. 654 of 2000, etc. The learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack taking into consideration the oral as well as documentary evidence, recorded the finding that the petitioner fell in love with opposite party at Delhi and blessed with a son. Thereafter, he returned to their native place at Derabis where a daughter was born, who died. Thereafter dissension cropped up between the parties and several meetings were held by the village gentries to solve the dispute. Finally the petitioner drove her out from his house for which criminal cases were initiated by the opposite party. The petitioner being a Tractor driver earned Rs. 3000 to Rs. 4000 per month and in the meantime he has married to another lady and is blessed with a son. Accordingly, the Family Court directed the petitioner to pay the monthly maintenance as stated in the foregoing paragraph.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner-husband submitted that the opposite party-wife in her deposition has admitted that she had married to one Umesh Jena and during subsistence of the said marriage, she lived with the petitioner and marriage between her and the petitioner was not valid. As the opposite party is not the wife of the petitioner, she is not entitled to get any maintenance. In support of his contention, he cited a decision of this Court in the case of Tankadhar Nath v. Prabhabati Nath, 1990 2 OrissaLR 548.