ORAL JUDGMENT

1. By way of the present application, the applicant has requested this Court to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated 27.03.2018 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhavnagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.567 of 2015.

2. It is the case of the applicant that the marriage between the petitioner-husband and the respondent-wife was solemnized around 20 years ago according to Hindu rites and rituals, after which the respondent started residing at her matrimonial home at Bhavnagar. Out of the wedlock, two children, one son and one daughter, were born. According to the petitioner, the marital relationship was cordial initially; however, disputes later arose between the parties owing to the alleged aggressive nature of the respondent-wife. It is the case of the petitioner that such disputes were ordinary wear and tear of married life and that there was no act on his part amounting to cruelty. It is further alleged that the respondent-wife left the matrimonial home on the pretext of visiting her parental home and thereafter deserted the petitioner. Subsequently, the respondent-wife initiated proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, making various allegations against the petitioner and his family members. The respondent-wife alleged that the petitioner was engaged in the business of manufacturing fishing nets and saree business and was earning Rs.60,000/- to Rs.70,000/- per month, and accordingly claimed maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month. However, according to the petitioner, without properly appreciating the evidence on record, the learned Family Court allowed the application and awarded maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of the application. Therefore, the present application.

3. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

4. The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the learned Family Court has failed to properly appreciate the oral as well as documentary evidence on record and has recorded findings based on surmises and conjectures. According to the applicant, the findings regarding his alleged income of Rs.6,000/- to Rs.7,000/- per month are not supported by any material on record, particularly when the respondent-wife herself had alleged that he was earning Rs.60,000/- to Rs.70,000/- per month from saree business and manufacturing of fishing nets. It was further submitted that the applicant is merely working as a labourer and does not have any fixed source of income or any saree business as alleged. The learned advocate further submitted that the applicant is required to incur expenses towards the education and maintenance of his two children, who are residing with him, as well as household expenses and medical expenses of his aged parents, who are senior citizens suffering from various ailments. Lastly, it was submitted that the learned Family Court has assigned no reasons for awarding maintenance from the date of the application and, therefore, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside.

5. The learned advocate for the respondent-wife opposed the present application and submitted that the learned Family Court has rightly appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence on record and has passed a well-reasoned order. It was submitted that the respondent-wife had specifically stated that the applicant was engaged in the business of sarees as well as manufacturing fishing nets and was earning substantial income therefrom. It was further submitted that the applicant is an able-bodied person and is capable of earning sufficient income to maintain the respondent-wife. The learned advocate submitted that the respondent-wife was compelled to reside separately due to the conduct of the applicant and his family members and that she has no independent source of income to maintain herself. It was also submitted that the amo