GEETA AND ORS. Vs. ROOPA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant 482 petition has been filed by Geeta W/o. Roopa Ram and two minor daughters Ms. Pinky and Ms. Pushpa in which it is prayed that respondent is not maintaining them, therefore, an application under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C. was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Siwana, District Barmer and alongwith the said application a prayer was made for granting interim maintenance in favour of the petitioners. The learned trial Court passed an order on 27.6.2014 whereby the interim maintenance of Rs. 500/ - is allowed to the petitioners which is very meager amount, therefore, the amount of maintenance may kindly be enhanced appropriately.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners submits that husband of the petitioner Geeta is working on the post of Teacher substantively and his salary is Rs. 30,000/ - per month but at the time of granting interim maintenance, only Rs. 500/ - interim maintenance is allowed by the learned trial Court, which is meager amount because in Rs. 500/ - it is not possible for the petitioners to survive and to get the education for two minor daughters, therefore, it is prayed that the order of interim maintenance may kindly be enhanced upto Rs. 15,000/ - because the respondent husband is getting Rs. 30,000/ - salary because he is working as teacher, so also, having his agricultural land from which he is earning more than Rs. 5 lacs in a year.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that there is no question of maintain 3 persons in Rs. 500/ -, therefore, the order of interim maintenance passed by the learned trial Court is not justified. More so, it is not in consonance with basic principle of law. Admittedly, the husband of the petitioner Geeta, Sh. Roopa Ram is working on the post of Teacher and this fact is admitted by him in the reply filed by him, therefore, obviously, he is getting near about Rs. 30,000/ - per month.