Parties granted revised maintenance terms after review of compliance and financial circumstances.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.R.C.No.241 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 Perumal ... Petitioner Vs.

Prema ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. to call for records of learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, Thiruvallur District and set aside the order passed by him in M.C.No.6 of

2012 dated 24.12.2014.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Madhan For Respondent : Ms.V.Vijayalakshmi Legal Aid Counsel ORDER Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listing on 24.09.2025, which reads as follows:

This Court, on 03.09.2025, had passed the following order:

“The petitioner, estranged husband of the respondent had faced prosecution in M.C.No.6 of 2012 and suffered an order of maintenance dated 24.12.2014, wherein the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as maintenance from the date of filing of the petition. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner filed the above revision in Crl.R.C.No.241 of 2015 along with stay petition in M.P.No.1 of 2015, wherein, this Court, by the order dated 23.03.2015 directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as monthly maintenance.

2.The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner married the respondent in the year 1992 and after the marriage, the petitioner and the respondent were living in a joint family with the respondent's parents. On 15.05.1993, they were blessed with a son named Dinesh Babu and now the son has completed his B.E. Degree. The petitioner projected himself that he is owning a shop, having sufficient income. Believing the same, the marriage was accepted, later it came to know that the petitioner was not having any shop and not employed anywhere. In the year 1995, the petitioner joined Tamil Nadu Electricity Board on contract basis and in the year 2004, he was observed permanent as an Assessor. In the year 2005, a girl baby was born and later died. Thereafter, there was no cordial relationship between the petitioner and the respondent and the petitioner was suspecting the respondent and they had a very stormy relationship. In the year 2010, the respondent had undergone uterus removal surgery. The petitioner paid for the surgery and later demanded medical expense of Rs.1,50,000/- to be paid by the respondent's parents. The petitioner admits that he had built a house on the vacant plot of the respondent's parents and the jewels of the respondent has been used by the petitioner. Later, the respondent was forced out of the house, forcing the respondent's parents to settle the property in favour of the petitioner. The respondent was forced to stay with her parents and the petitioner and his son alone were staying in the house. The petitioner failed to pay any amount for maintenance. Hence, a maintenance petition seeking Rs.10,000/- as monthly maintenance was filed. Before the Lower Court the respondent examined herself as PW1 and marked 6 documents. The petitioner examined himself as RW1 and his son as RW2 and marked 5 documents.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the admitted case of the respondent is that divorce has been obtained in H.M.O.P.No.163 of 2015 on 29.01.2025 by the Subordinate Court, Poonamallee. He further submitted that the petitioner is presently without any employment and not attending the office. The petitioner transferred from Chennai to Cuddalore, he has undergone spinal cord surgery and unable to travel and is on loss of pay and he has no source to pay the maintenance amount. Further he had purchased two properties and settled the same in the name of his son.

4.The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that even the modified maintenanc