BIDUTLATA ROUT Vs. PRAMOD KUMAR ROUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE deserted and neglected wife -the petitioner No. 1, along with her innocent, deprived of fatherly care and concern -the minor child, has preferred the present revision claiming enhancement of the quantum of maintenance, being dissatisfied with the order whereby the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack, has awarded maintenance @Rs. 200/ -and Rs. 100/ - per month in favour of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 respectively from the date of presentation of the petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code') forming the subject matter of Criminal Proceeding No. 123 of 1992.

(2.) THE essential facts are : -

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that once there is a finding that the opposite party is working as a permanent labourer in Paradeep Phosphates Limited, the learned Judge, Family Court, should have allowed the maintenance at the rate prayed for by the petitioners. It is also his submission that there has been no dispute with regard to owning of four acres of landed property, but only stand taken is that this property belongs to the father of opposite party and he has one brother and five sisters.