1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.136/2009. Shri Yuvraj s/o Baburao Pahelwan - PETITIONER VERSUS Sow.Sunita w/o Yuvraj Pahelwan - RESPONDENT ***** Mr.Subhash Gaikwad Advocate for Petitioner; Mr.N.G.Kale, Advocate for Respondent. ----- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 29th September, 2009. PER COURT : 1) Rule, Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent of parties, heard finally. 2) The Award by learned Judge of the Family Court, Aurangabad in Petition No. E-156/2008 by order dated 9th April, 2009, directing the husband to make remittance of Rs.1200/- to the wife and Rs. 800/- to female child (then six months old) effective from 7th May, 2008, is subject of challenge before this Court. 3) The matrimonial discord between the parties has virtually made their matrimonial life 2 to turbulence. They could not exert the endurance level to accommodate each other and depressed for every angularities in the relations they have approached the court. Out of the wedlock, they have a son, who is maintained by the husband whereas the daughter namely Sakshi is with the wife. Said Sakshi was six months old when the petition was filed. 4) Though the acrimony of interse relations has reached its peak, the fact remains that the wife or the daughter is expected to live in atmosphere akin to the standard of the husband or of the father of the child. Applying this scale, I find that the husband was a Trainee Operator with earning stipend of Rs.2750/-, effective from the date of his joining, i.e. 3rd May, 2007, at International Conveyors Limited. He was discontinued by termination letter dated October 31, 2007 effective from 1st of November, 2007. Such documents were tendered before the learned Judge of the Family Court below Exhibit-16-A and the respondent/husband has contended that he has become a casual labour getting earning of Rs. 80/- per day. The learned Judge of the Family Court observed in paragraph 20 by carrying regular assessment that the daily income should be Rs.150/-. Considering the present scenario of the average income and by making calculations, he 3 inferred that the husband must be drawing income of Rs.5,000/- per month and consequently he concluded that the husband is having sufficient means to pay separate maintenance allowance to his wife. 5) It was contended that the wife is able- bodied and involved in stitching activities and thereby getting a good yield. However, it is only word against word, without any proper evidence from any person endorsing what the husband has contemplated. 6) The fact remains, as stated earlier, the wife and the daughter cannot be left to winds and the obligation is cast on the husband to maintain them. One should not be oblivious that the husband has to maintain a son out of the wedlock, who is also minor, and most of the time of the husband is attended in oscillating with the litigation faced or branded by the wife against him. 7) Since there is no fixed take-home income to the husband and he has become casual labourer by virtue of efflux of situation, though one should accept that the present day earning of a labour ranges between Rs.100 to 150, but it cannot be a regular income per day. On 4 occasions, there are breaks and casual discontinuance in employment. Assessing these aspects, I find that the Award of Rs.1200/- per month to the wife and Rs. 800/- per month to the daughter/child is at excessive level, it needs little modification as indicated in the operative part of the order. 8) Needless to add, if the husband gets regular employment, the avenues open to the wife to seek enhancement in maintenance in terms of Section 127 of Cr.P.C. for herself and her daughter, are unbridled. Hence, order. 9) Criminal Revision Application is partly allowed. 10) The order dated 9th April, 2009 passed by the learned Judge of Family Court, Aurangabad is modified, as under - (i) The husband to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) per month to the wife and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) to the female child Sakshi by way of monthly maintenance from 7th May, 2008. (ii) The husband will also pay the costs of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) as directed by the learned Judge of the Family court. 5 (iii) Whatever past payments the husband has made, including deposits dated 23rd September, 2009, those shall be subject to accounts. (iv) The wife is at liberty to withdraw the amount of Rs.12,000/- (Rupees twelve thousands) deposited by the husband in the Family Court, Aurangabad in E.R.No.234/2009. 11) Rule is partly made absolute in the aforesaid terms. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/crrv136.09