(1.) The petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 31.03.2016 passed in Maintenance Case No. 77 of 2014 by which he has been directed to pay Rs. 7,000/- per month to his wife and Rs. 3,500/- per month each to both his daughters for their maintenance.
(2.) Mr. Sanjay Prasad, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that mother of opposite party no. 1, who is the applicant under section 125 Cr.P.C, has stated that her daughter should stay with her husband and, therefore, it is evident that the opposite party no. 1 has no reasonable ground not to live in the company of her husband.
(3.) On such ground, Mr. Sanjay Prasad, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of sub-section 4 to section 125 Cr.P.C the wife of the petitioner is not entitled to claim maintenance from him.