ORDER :

Dr. H.B. Prabhakara Sastry, J.

1. The present respondent (wife) had instituted a petition against the present petitioner (husband), arraigning him as the respondent, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the "Cr.P.C.") in Crl. Misc. No. 206/2009, in the Court of the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the "Family Court"), seeking maintenance at the rate of Rs. 7,500/- per month and also Rs. 50,000/- towards the litigation expenses from the petitioner (husband).

2. The summary of the contention of the respondent (wife) in the Family Court was that, her marriage with the petitioner herein was performed on 19-05-1995 in Tumakur District. No issues were born to them. The petitioner has been working in Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), Engine Division, Bangalore, and drawing a monthly salary of a sum of Rs. 20,000/-. Apart from the same, he also owns a building in Peenya Dasarahalli, consisting of shops and residential portions and getting rent of Rs. 10,000/- per month. The petitioner also owns landed properties in his native place. Since the petitioner deserted her, she is staying with her mother since 14-11-2008. Till the date of deserting her, the petitioner was subjecting her to cruelty and had neglected her and deprived her of the basic necessities in life.

It is further alleged in the petition that, in the month of June, the petitioner married a minor girl by name Sumathi at Sriramapura, Hosadurga Taluk. With this, she has prayed for monthly maintenance of a sum of Rs. 7,500/- and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards litigation expenses.

3. In response to the summons served upon him, the respondent in the Family Court appeared through his counsel and filed his statement of objections, wherein, he has admitted his marital relationship with the respondent herein, however, specifically denied the alleged ill-treatment said to have been meted to the respondent and also deserting her. On the other hand, he contended that, the respondent was quarrel-some lady and he tolerated her attitude, but still, she voluntarily deserted him without any reasons. He contended that, his net salary was only Rs. 8,000/- per month and the income from rent was only a sum of Rs. 2,000/- per month. He further contended that, though he wanted his wife to come and join him and had also sent a notice to that effect, since she did not turn up, he is not liable to pay any maintenance to her.

4. At the first instance, both the petitioner and respondent led their evidence in the Family Court as RW-1 and PW-1 respectively and the respondent (wife) got marked documents from Exhibits P-1 to P-4 and petitioner (husband) got marked documents as Exhibits R-1 and R-2 and after remand, both of them led their further oral evidence as PW-1 (wife) and RW-1 (husband) and few more documents were marked.

5. Before remand, the Family Court, after hearing both side, in its order dated 25-07-2012, allowed the petition in part and held that, the petitioner before it was entitled to monthly maintenance of a sum of Rs. 3,000/- from the date of filing of the petition, i.e. from 13-04-2009 during her lifetime and payable by the respondent before it.

6. The Respondent herein (wife) being not satisfied with the quantum of maintenance awarded in her favour by the Family Court, on the ground that it is inadequate, preferred a Revision Petition before this Court in R.P.F.C. No. 82/2013 (Crl. Misc.), which matter came to be disposed of by this Court on 01-07-2016, wherein, after setting aside the impugned order passed by the Family Court, the matter was remanded back to the said Court for its fresh consideration after affording opportunity to the petitioner before it to adduce oral evidence and to furnish any documents, if any. After remand, the parties led their further oral evidence and some more documents were marked as Exhibits.

7. After remand, the Family Court, afte