K.N. Phaneendra, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the judgment of the trial Court and first Appellate Court.

2. There is no dispute between the parties with regard to their relationship. For the purpose of convenience and easy understanding, I would like to refer the parties as per their ranks before the trial court.

3. The petitioner Smt. Vaishali wife of the first respondent Anil Appanna Randewadi had filed a matrimonial case in Crl. Misc.No.130/2010 before the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Khanapur under Section 12(1) of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, claiming various reliefs against the respondents. The Respondents therein appeared and contested the proceedings by filing their objections.

4. In order to prove her case, petitioner examined herself as PW1 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to 7. Respondent No. 1 himself examined as RW1 and also examined one witness as RW2 and got marked Exs.R1 to R34.

5. The trial court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record came to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for the reliefs as claimed in the petition