GANESHLAL Vs. LEELA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner husband aged about 65 years, challenging the order dated 7.10.2006 passed by the learned Family Judge Udaipur in case No. 416/2002 whereby she has enhanced the maintenance allowance to respondent wife from Rs.500.00 to Rs.1,000.00 per month allowing the application filed by the respondent.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that previously the respondent preferred an application under Sec. 127 Crimial P.C. and the same was decided by consent of the parties and an agreement was entered into whereby the amount of the maintenance was enhanced from Rs.400.00 to Rs.500.00 per month. Thus, he submits that once the respondent herself agreed to said enhanced amount of maintenance with a further condition that in future, the respondent would not be entitled to claim a greater sum of maintenance, then as per the learned counsel, the enhancement of the maintenance was absolutely unjustified. He further submits that in the proceedings under Sec. 127 Crimial P.C. the petitioner placed on record the document/agreement between the parties as per which the petitioner for the purpose of providing maintenance parted with one bigha of land and also gave the respondent a lumpsum of Rs.1 lakh. He further submits that two of the petitioner's daughters unmarried are living with him and that the respondent herself earns by selling coconuts, milk etc. thus, he submits that there was no justification for enhancement of the maintenance to the respondent. He further submits that the petitioner is a retired Government servant and gets a pension of Rs.4000.00 per month and he being an aged person needs the said amount for his upkeep and for the maintenance of his two daughters.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for respondent submits that no illegality is disclosed in order of the Court below and no interference is called for in the impugned order.