ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-husband assailing the order dated 26.07.2016 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Dharwad in Crl. Misc.126/2013 granting maintenance of Rs.8,000/- to the respondent-wife.

2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. For the convenience, parties are referred to as referred in the trial Court.

4. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner is wife of the respondent and their marriage is not in dispute and they got two sons and two daughters. Thereafter, the respondent-husband neglected her by suspecting her fidelity and he has not been paid maintenance and as such she filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for claiming the maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month. Family Court after considering the evidence placed on record and on perusal of the documents awarded maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month from the date of the petition . Challenging the same, respondent-husband is before this Court.

5. It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the petitioner-wife herself left the company of the petitioner without there being any just cause. She herself has deserted under such circumstances, the Court below ought not to have awarded any maintenance, the petition ought to have been dismissed. The said evidence is not properly looked into by the trial Court. She further submitted that out of four children, two are working as teachers and she could have also claimed maintenance from those two children. She further submits that because of his old age suffering from ill health.

6. It is further submitted that an amount of Rs.20,000/- has been deducted for GPF contribution and the other deductions which are going to be made by the respondent-husband with that only an amount of Rs.25,510/- he gets and he has to maintain the other members of the family. Under such circumstances the maintenance which has been awarded to the extent of Rs.8,000/- is on the higher side. On these grounds he prays to allow the petition by setting aside the impugned order.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-wife vehemently argued and submitted that the evidence which has been produced before the Court below clearly goes to show that she has been kept separately along with his brothers and even he used to come by consuming alcohol and used to harass her and also used to suspect her fidelity and he has not paid any maintenance.

8. He Further submits that petitioner-husband is working as a warden in BCM hostel in BEO office and getting salary of Rs.41,000/- and odd. By taking into consideration the said aspect, the Court below has rightly come to the conclusion and has awarded Rs.8,000/- and the petitioner has not made out any good ground to interfere with the said order and the same deserves to be dismissed.

9. I have carefully gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. I have also perused the records and order of the trial Court.

10. It is not in dispute that the marriage of the petitioner got performed with the respondent-wife on 28.04.1988 and thereafter they have begotten four children and it is also not in dispute that after marriage of the two daughter, because of difference of opinion, they took divorce and now they are staying along with petitioner-wife.

11. It is a specific contention of the petitioner-

wife that the respondent suspect her fidelity and used to ill treat and harass and he has also kept her separately along with her brothers and has not paid any maintenance. It is her further case that she is not having any other sources of income to maintain herself.

12. It is her case that her husband is working as warden in BCM hostel in BEO office and drawing a handsome salary and as such she prays to grant the maintenance. She has been examined herself as PW1 and she has also got examined two more witnesses and has got marked Exhibits P1 to P15. Respondent- husband has examined himself as