IMPORTANT POINT
Maintenance of wife—It is not only moral obligation, but a legal duty cast upon husband to maintain his wife and children.

JUDGMENT

Dr. K. Manmadha Rao, J.—The present appeal came to be filed, under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 [for short, “F.C. Act”], challenging the order dated 18.02.2020 passed in F.C.O.P. No.60 of 2018 by the Judge, Family Court-cum-III Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram (for short “the trial Court”). By way of the said order, the Court below granted maintenance to the respondents herein @ Rs.9,000/- and Rs.5,000/- per month respectively from the date of the said order.

2. The respondents herein filed the above mentioned F.C.O.P. No.60 of 2018 against the appellant herein for the following reliefs:

“...(a) Directing the appellant to pay maintenance @ Rs.25,000/- per month towards maintenance to the respondents herein (i.e., Rs.15,000/- to the 1st respondent and Rs.5,000/- to the 2nd respondent) towards food, clothes shelter, medicines and education;

(b) Directing the appellant to pay past maintenance to both the respondents @ Rs.6,20,000/- from May 2016 till the date of that petition; and

(c) Costs of the petition and...”

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to, as they are arrayed before the trial Court.

4. The brief facts of the case are that :

The 1st petitioner is legally wedded wife of the respondent. Their marriage was solemnized on 30.06.2015 as per Hindu rites and Caste custom at Khargpur. At the time of marriage, her parents spent Rs.2,00,000/- towards marriage expenses, gave Rs.6,00,000/- dowry, Rs.1,00,000/- towards vehicle, Rs.60,000/- towards Adapaduchu katnam and also sare samans worth Rs.1,00,000/- besides present two tulas of gold to the respondent as demanded by them. They lived together one and half years and out of their wedlock, they blessed with a baby girl i.e., the 2nd petitioner on 26.8.2016. According to her, from the beginning, the respondent, his parents, his brother and aunt Sarada started harassing her both physically and mentally demanding her to bring more amount from her parents. She pleaded that the parents of the respondent advised her to leave him permanently. She further pleaded that after their marriage, only on four occasions, she went to her parents’ house. Subsequently, her parents invited the respondent on the occasion of their first marriage anniversary, but he refused and insulted by using filthy language, stating that it is to worst to come to their house. After birth of the 2nd petitioner, none came from the house of the respondent and even did not make a phone call for courtesy. Thereafter, so many requests were made by the mother of the 1st petitioner to the respondent to take back his wife and baby girl, but the respondent ignored their words as he was not interested to take her along with girl child and postponed the same on one pretext or the other. Though the respondent refused to take them back, she did not lodge any report before the police about their harassment and desertion. She also pleaded that she is an un-employee and herself and her daughter are depending upon her parents, who are more than 70 years old and that she has no movable or immovable properties and has no means for their livelihood. The 1st petitioner mainly pleaded that her husband/the respondent has been working in Indian Railways as a Technician, Grade-II in Wagon Shop at Kharagpur and drawing Rs.60,000/- per month as salary and further he is earning Rs.30,000/- on finance business, in total, he is getting Rs.90,000/- per month and leading lavish life, but intentionally neglecting them to their fate. Hence, she filed the above FCOP for the above said relief.

5. Counter came to be filed by the respondent therein admitting the relationship in between himself and the 1st petitioner therein, but refuting the other allegations made in the 1st petitioner inter alia contending that he studied 10th class, his father and the father of the 1st petitioner worked in Railway department at Kharagpur. There was acquaintance between them, after his father took volun