O R D E R

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the revision petitioners to set aside the order in C.A.No.22 of 2018, dated 27.11.2019, by partly confirming the order of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thanjavur in MC.No.37 of 2014, dated 07.03.2018, by granting monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to the second revision petitioner and dismissed the same, so far as, the first revision petitioner is concerned.

2.The facts in brief is as follows:

The marriage between the husband/first respondent and the wife/first revision petitioner was performed, as per their customary rites and rituals on 01.02.2009. After the marriage, the second revision petitioner was born on 19.03.2012 and till that time there was no problem between them. According to the wife, the problem started after the birth of second revision petitioner and the husband's family demanded Rs.2 lakhs as dowry, but it was not complied with by the first revision petitioner and paid only Rs.1,50,000/-. Later, there was a compromise between them in June to August, 2012 and they started living together, as joint family and during that time, according to the wife, she was ill treated and harassed. Therefore, she lodged a complaint on 25.09.2014, before the Madhavaram Police Station. A case in Crime No.346 of 2014 was registered and it is stated to be pending. Because of the above said torture, she was driven out of the house.

3.On these grounds, she filed a petition under Provisions of Domestic Violence Act, claiming Rs.10,000/- as maintenance amount each for herself and for the minor child/second revision petitioner and also for other reliefs. In the said petition, apart from the above said claim of maintenance amount, she was also granted with some other reliefs, which we are not concerned herewith. On the side of wife, 6 documents were marked and she was examined as PW1. On the side of husband, two documents were marked and himself examined as RW1. At the conclusion of enquiry as stated above, the trial Court dismissed the petition. Against which, the above said appeal has been preferred before the lower appellate Court and the said appeal was also partly allowed, by granting monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to the second revision petitioner and dismissed the same, so far as, the first revision petitioner is concerned.

4.The prayer of maintenance was resisted by the husband stating that right from the date of marriage, the wife was not behaving as a dutiful wife, without proper reason she deserted the matrimonial home and thereafter living in her parental home. According to him, he is not liable to pay maintenance to the wife.

5.Now, challenging the above said order, this revision has been preferred by the wife and child, stating that the wife is also entitled for compensation and the child is also entitled for enhanced maintenance. The points for consideration is

1. Whether the claim made by the wife/first revision petitioner is maintainable or not?

2. Whether the child/second revision petitioner is entitled for enhanced maintenance?

Point No.1:

6.I am unable to convince with the reason assigned by trial Court, in refusing the maintenance amount to the wife. The trial Court has taken into account of the conduct of the wife, during the course of evidence. It has been pointed out that for most of the questions, the wife has not given any ready/immediate answer and after a long thinking only, she gave the evidence. But this is not sufficient to reject the claim and finding that the wife did not maintain good conduct. Absolutely, the finding is erroneous in nature. There is no allegation to the effect that the wife is suffering from any understanding incapacity. So that ought not have been taken into account by the trial Court.

7.Now, coming to the ground of desertion, she was subjected to cross examination at length. More than, in two occasions, she was recalled and cross examined. During the course of cross examination, she has stated that at the time of marriage, the respon