ORDER

1. The challenge in this Revision Application is to the judgment and order dated 7 th February, 2019 passed by Judge, Family Court No. 2, Pune in Petition No.E-102 of 2016, whereby the learned Judge was persuaded to order payment of an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month to the Respondent-wife from the date of application and an amount of Rs.7,000/- as cost of litigation under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 ("the Code").

2. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the parties are hereinafter referred to in the capacity in which they were arraigned before the learned Judge, Family Court.

3. Shorn of the necessary details the background facts leading to this Application can be stated as under:

The marriage of the Applicant was solemnized with the Respondent on 12 th November, 1997 in accordance with Hindu religious rites and ceremonies. The Applicant claimed, since inception of marital life the Respondent treated the Applicant with extreme cruelty. The Applicant was subjected to harassment inorder to coerce her to meet unlawful demands. The Respondent had dropped the Applicant at her parental home at Satara in the month of January, 1999. Despite repeated assurances the Respondent did not come to fetch back the Applicant to her marital home. Ultimately with the intervention of police the Applicant was allowed to enter her matrimonial home at Mahatma Society, Pune. Thereafter the Respondent and Applicant moved out of the matrimonial home and started to reside separately from the in-laws of the Applicant, at Karve Nagar, Pune. Subsequently, the Applicant and Respondent shifted to an apartment at Sinhgad Road, Pune.

In the month of April, 2007 the Respondent expressed his desire to obtain divorce from the Applicant. When the Applicant remonstrated, the Respondent ill-treated her. In order to avoid harassment at the hands of the Respondent the Applicant signed the documents for presenting a Petition for obtaining divorce by mutual consent as the Respondent had assured the Applicant that he would continue to maintain the marital relationship with her despite a paper decree of divorce. Accordingly, a decree of divorce by mutual consent was obtained on 25 th October, 2007. Despite, the decree of dissolution of marriage, the Respondent continued to visit the Applicant at her apartment at Singhgad road and had marital relations as well.

4. From the month of September, 2012 the Respondent stopped the visits to the house of the Applicant. The Respondent had not made any provision for the maintenance and livelihood of the Applicant. The Applicant has no source of income. The Applicant could sustain herself on the financial support of her father. In contrast, the Respondent has sufficient means. The Respondent deals in a thriving business under the name and style "P.C.Care". The Respondent owns a huge bungalow at Mahatma Society and another plot of land at Budhwar Peth, Pune. The Respondent also owns an office premises admeasuring 400 sq.ft. at Shaniwar Peth, Pune. Despite having sumptuous income the Respondent refused and neglected to provide for the necessities of life of the Applicant. Hence, the Applicant was constrained to prefer the application for award of maintenance at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per month, under section 125 of the Code.

5. The Respondent appeared and resisted the claim by filing written statement. The Respondent controverted the allegations that the Applicant was subjected to ill-treatment. In contrast, according to the Respondent, the Applicant was suffering from psychological illness and thus the marriage could not be consummated. At the instance of the Respondent, the Applicant availed treatment from leading sexologists yet there was no improvement in the psychological condition of the Applicant. As the marriage could not be consummated on account of the psychological problems, which the Applicant suffered from, the Respondent had filed a Petition under section 12(1)(a) and section 13(1)(ia) of