HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.483 of 2011 Date: January 20, 2014 Between:
Kasula Manohar … Petitioner and
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & 4 others. … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.483 of 2011 J U D G M E N T:
This revision is preferred against the order dated 04.01.2011 passed in M.C. No.79 of 2009 on the file of the Judge, Family Court- cum-III Additional District Judge, Warangal, whereunder the maintenance application filed by respondents 2 to 5 herein is partly allowed granting monthly maintenance to respondents 3 to 5 herein at the rate of Rs.1,500/- each i.e., a total sum of Rs.4,500/- to the minor children and refused maintenance to the 2nd respondent herein, who is the wife.
2. This Court on 07.03.2011, while ordering notice before admission, granted interim suspension of the impugned order on condition of revision petitioner herein depositing entire arrears calculating at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per month towards maintenance to the children within a period of four weeks and shall continue to pay at the same rate on or before 10th of every succeeding month.
3. The 2nd respondent herein, in fact, claimed a monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month for herself and Rs.3,000/- each for children and after enquiry, the learned trial Judge granted maintenance to the children at the rate of Rs.1,500/- each and refused maintenance to the wife on the ground that she is getting a salary of Rs.3,000/- per month. The learned trial Judge conducted enquiry during which one witness was examined on behalf of respondents 2 to 5 herein and no one was examined on behalf of the revision petitioner.
4. Now, the contention of the advocate for respondents 2 to 5 is that the revision petitioner has not complied even the conditional order dated 07.03.2011 granted by this Court and not paying any maintenance to the children. Admittedly, the revision petitioner is working as a Goldsmith and the children are prosecuting their studies at Hanamkonda and studying 4th class onwards at the time of filing of the maintenance case. The learned trial Judge, after considering all these aspects, granted Rs.1,500/- per month to each child and in my view the said amount is not on higher side and it is a reasonable amount in the present days of high prices. Since the wife has to meet the education expenses besides providing food and other amenities to the children, Rs.1,500/- per month to each child is a quite reasonable amount. I do not find any wrong appreciation of evidence for granting maintenance to the children and on a scrutiny of material on record, I am of the considered view that there are no grounds to interfere with the findings of the trial court and that the revision is devoid of merits.
5. Accordingly the criminal revision case is dismissed at the stage of admission.
S. RAVI KUMAR, J Date: January 20, 2014.
BSB
30 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.483 of 2011 Date: January 20, 2014 BSB