LAWS(RAJ)-2011-7-220

CHANDRA KALA @ DURGA MENARIYA Vs. NARMADA SHANKER

Decided On July 15, 2011
CHANDRA KALA @ DURGA MENARIYA Appellant
V/S
NARMADA SHANKER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Hoping for enhancement of the maintenance amount, the petitioner has filed the present petition against the order dated 29.8.2008, passed by the Family Court, Udaipur; the learned Judge has directed the respondent husband to pay a maintenance of merely Rs. 2,000 per month to the petitioner from the date of the order.

(2.) Vide order dated 7.7.2011, this Court had clearly noted that on 5.7.2011, Mr. Sabir Khan had sought adjournment on behalf of Deepak Menaria, the learned counsel for the respondent. However, even on 7.7.2011, Mr. Menaria did not appear before this Court. Therefore, in the interest of justice, this case was adjourned till today. But it was made amply clear that in case Mr. Deepak Menaria does not appear on the next date, this Court shall have no other option out to proceed ex paste against the respondent. Despite clear observation by this Court, even today, Mr. Menaria has not appeared before the Court. Hence, this Court has no other option but to proceed ex parte against the respondent.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner wife and respondent husband were married on 20.5.1989 according to Hindu customs and rites. However, subsequently, the petitioner was subjected to mental and physical cruelty on the ground that the petitioner should have brought Rs. 20,000 from her parents. Because of the differences, that arose between the parties, the petitioner had no option but to leave the matrimonial home. However, she was unable to maintain herself. Therefore, she filed an application under Sec. 125 Crimial P.C., for seeking maintenance from her husband. During the course of trial, the petitioner pleaded that the respondent husband was employed as a teacher in Government School, Badgaon and was earning about Rs. 8,000.00 per month. Moreover, he had 16 bighas of land from which he was earning agriculture income. According to the petitioner, he was earning approximately Rs. 15,000 per month. However despite the oral evidence, still the learned Court granted a mere maintenance of Rs. 2,000.00 per month and that too from the date of the order. Hence, this petition before this Court.