(1.) Petitioner has preferred this revision petition under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 397 / 401 Cr.P.C. to challenge order dated 5th of October, 2017 passed by Judge, Family Court No.1, Bikaner (for short, 'learned Court below'). By the order impugned, learned Court below, while partly accepting application of the respondents under Section 125 Cr.P.C., granted maintenance to the tune of Rs.7,000/- to respondent No.2 (daughter of petitioner) and Rs.7,000/- to respondent No.3 (minor daughter of petitioner) per mensem.
(2.) During pendency of the application, first respondent wife has not pressed her claim for maintenance.
(3.) It is argued by learned Senior Counsel that amount of maintenance for two daughters cumulatively to the tune of Rs.14,000/- determined and awarded by learned Court below is excessive and exorbitant inasmuch as there was no cogent proof about income of petitioner. Learned Senior Counsel submits that old parents of the petitioner are also dependent on him and therefore with his limited resources he is facing great hardship to meet both the ends. It is also submitted by learned Senior Counsel that before learned Court below monthly income of the petitioner was proved to the tune of Rs.31,000/-only still the Court below has awarded maintenance of Rs.14,000/-, which is improper and infirm, merits interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.