THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. SURI APPA RAO F.C.A.No.87 of 2010 Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) This Family Court Appeal is directed against the order dated 16.07.2009, passed by the Family Court-cum-IV Additional District & Sessions Court, Vijayawada in O.P.No.73 of 2007. It is the case of the appellant, who is the mother of the respondent, that earlier she filed O.S.No.76 of 1999 against the respondent seeking maintenance and the said suit was decreed directing the respondent to pay maintenance @ Rs.1,000/- per month to her. It is stated that the respondent is working as a Driver in A.P.S.E.B and drawing a salary of Rs.20,000/- per month. Contending that as she is suffering with Heart, B.P., Sugar and other problems, and the maintenance amount of Rs.1,000/- granted in the earlier O.P is not sufficient for her maintenance and medical expenses, she filed the present O.P. seeking enhancement of maintenance from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.3,000/- per month. The respondent contested the O.P. by filing counter stating that after the death of his father, his mother received an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- towards retirement, death and other benefits; that he had also paid an amount of Rs.65,000/- towards arrears of maintenance to his mother; that his mother filed another suit in O.S.No.4032 of 2004 on the file of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada for permanent injunction and the same is pending; that though his mother is entitled to pension on the death of her husband, she did not file any application for the same in order to harass him; that his mother is also receiving widow and old age benefits from the State and Central Governments and pension from the Panchayat and also M.L.A, M.P etc., relief funds every month; that though he is a government employee and his salary is Rs.21,000/-, he is getting salary only Rs.824/- per month after deductions; that his elder son is studying Engineering at Pune for which he had obtained loan from the bank; that due to lack of income, his second son is not studying further and that he has no capacity to pay additional amount to his mother. The Family Court, after considering the entire material available on record, held that a perusal of Exs.A.2 and A.3 discloses that the appellant was suffering with common ailments of an aged person and she was not suffering with any serious ailment; that even though the respondent as R.W.1 deposed that after the death of his father, his mother received an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- towards death benefits, he did not mention about the family pension in his evidence; that as per the admitted evidence of P.W.2, the appellant received an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards death benefits of her husband; that the grant of maintenance is for the maintenance and sustenance of the appellant with minimum requirements for her livelihood but not to spend the same towards legal expenses to file suits against the respondent and that though the salary of the respondent was Rs.21,000/- per month, he was getting very less amount after deductions, and accordingly dismissed the O.P. Hence, this appeal. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondent. As can be seen from the material available on record, the respondent alleges that even though the appellant is entitled to pension on the death of her husband, she did not file any application for the same intentionally in order to harass him. However, as the appellant is an old aged woman and suffering with health problems, and since it is the duty of the son to take utmost care of his old aged mother by providing all possible amenities, and in view of the hike in prices, we deem it appropriate that ends of justice would be met, if the maintenance is enhanced to Rs.2,000/- per month. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part enhancing the maintenance from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.2,000/- per month. There shall be no order as to costs. N.V. RAMANA, J V. SURI APPA RAO, J Date: 28.01.2011 va