Wife’s entitlement to maintenance based on evidence of harassment and the respondent's financial capacity.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER This Revision Petition is filed by petitioners –wife and daughter of the respondent challenging non award of maintenance to petitioner No.1 and award of lower maintenance to petitioner No.2 by the I Additional Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura in Crl.Misc.No.488/2019 dated

13.10.2023.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent.

3. Petitioner No.1 is wife and petitioner No.2 is daughter of the respondent. Petitioners have file petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C before family Court seeking maintenance of Rs.15,000/- for petitioner No.1 and Rs.10,000/- for petitioner No.2. It is the case of petitioners that the respondent at instigation of his family members started to torture her and forcing her to bring dowry of Rs.7 lakhs from her parents. When petitioner No.1 expresses her inability to meet out his demand, he started torturing her mentally and physically and deserted her and her daughter during the month of March-2019. They contended that the respondent is working as Cashier in State Bank of India and he getting the salary of Rs.50,000/- per month.

4. The respondent in his statement of objections has denied all allegations made against him. The respondent has admitted relationship. He contended that after the birth of petitioner No.2, petitioner No.1 at instigation of her brothers started to quarrel with him and his family members for silly reasons. The respondent contended that he is having mother aged about 100 years and he has to take care of her. He contended that after the death of his father, he got job at State Bank of India on compassionate ground. He contended that petitioner No.1 is doing tailoring work and also having computer knowledge and getting income of Rs.8,000/- to Rs.10,000/- per month. He contended that he has filed petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act against petitioner. The family Court recorded evidence of petitioners and respondent and thereafter, passed the impugned order of maintenance to petitioner No.2 in sum of Rs.7,000/- and rejecting claim of petitioner No.1 for maintenance.

5. Aggrieved by the said order of the Family Court, petitioners are before this Court.

6. Learned counsel for petitioners would contend that petitioner No.1 is left her matrimonial house due to harassment by the respondent. She is not having any income. Family Court has erred in rejecting the claim of maintenance of petitioner No.1 only on the ground that she insisted the respondent to make separate house to reside separately from his mother and she has left matrimonial house voluntarily without any reason. He contended that the respondent is getting salary of Rs.67,000/- as per his pay slip –Ex.P3. Considering the same, maintenance in sum of Rs.7,000/- per month is on lower side. With these, he prayed to modifying the order passed by the Family Court by awarding maintenance to petitioner No.1 and award maintenance higher than awarded by family Court to petitioner No.2.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that evidence of P.W.1 indicate that she is insisting the respondent to make separate house to reside separately from his mother with petitioners and she has left matrimonial house voluntarily without any reason. He submits that considering the said aspect, the family Court has rightly rejected the claim of petitioner No.1. He further submits that considering the age of petitioner No.2 and salary of respondent No.2, the family Court has rightly awarded maintenance of Rs.7,000/- to petitioner No.2. With these, he prays to dismiss the petition.

8. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has perused impugned order and trial Court records.

9. Relationship between parties is not in dispute.

Petitioner No. 1 is wife and petitioner No.