The court emphasized the financial capacity of the husband and the settled position of law regarding the commencement date of maintenance payments.

JUDGMENT :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. This Criminal Revision Petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. and under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this revision petition filed by the petitioners may kindly be allowed:

i. The impugned order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the Learned Family Court, Rajsamand (Raj.) in Criminal Case No. 22/2018 (Smt. Seema Pareekh & ors. v. Shri Gopal Pareekh) may kindly be quashed and set-aside.

ii. The monthly maintenance of Rs. 11,000/- (Rupees Eleven Thousand) may kindly be enhanced to Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand).

iii. The monthly maintenance may kindly be ordered from the date of filing of the application (i.e. 23.03.2018)."

2. As revealed from the aforequoted prayer clauses, this Criminal Revision Petition assails the order dated 31.01.2020, passed by the learned Family Court, Rajasamand in Smt. Seema Pareekh & Ors. v. Shri Gopal Pareekh, Case No. 22/2018, while seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount of Rs. 11,000/-, as granted to the revisionist-petitioners (wife, son and daughter, respectively, of the respondent) by the learned Court below.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners submited that the revisionist-petitioners filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the learned court below on 23.03.2018, stating therein that the revisionist-petitioner no. 1, Smt. Seema Pareek (hereinafter referred to as 'the wife') and the respondent, Shri Gopal Pareek (hereinafter referred to as 'the husband') entered into the wedlock, as per Hindu rituals and customs, on 15.01.2007, and that, out of the said wedlock, two children were born to them, a son, i.e. revisionist-petitioner no. 2 and a daughter, i.e. revisionist-petitioner no. 3; the age of the children was 10 years and 05 years respectively, on the date of passing of the impugned order, and that the respondent-husband deserted the revisionist-petitioners since the last five years from filing of the said application.

3.1 Learned counsel further submitted that after marriage, the husband and his family members began harassing the wife, which continued when she was pregnant with their son. And that the same continued despite the husband and wife moving to Indore, and that therefore, she had to move back to her maternal home on 05.03.2016.

3.2 Learned counsel also submitted that the wife does not have any independent source of income and that she is not in a position to financially sustain herself and her two children. And that, the husband in fact has a shop in Kota, Rajasthan from which he earns a yearly rent of about Rs. 2 Lakhs, and also owns about 39 bighas of land, an agricultural farm which has housing of about 15-20 rooms and shops outside, from which he generates a monthly income of about Rs. 50,000/-

3.3 Learned counsel further submitted that looking into the income and holdings of the husband, the wife sought a monthly maintenance of Rs.20,000/- for children and herself under Section 125 Cr.P.C. application filed before the learned Family Court below. And that in response to the same, the husband, while denying the averments made by the wife, stated that he has already opened an FDR in the name of the wife, to the tune of Rs. 52,000/- and has also taken an insurance policy for their children, for which he is making a premium payment of Rs. 7,767/- annually.

3.4 Learned counsel also submitted that while the learned Court below rightly held that the husband is competent and has the financial capacity to pay a monthly maintenance to the revisionist- petitioners, it incorrectly and without any cogent reasoning or justification awarded a meagre amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 11,000/- per month.

3.5 Learned counsel further submitted that the learned court below has gravely erred not only in the determination of the amount of the monthly maintenance, as mentioned hereinabove, but also in