IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.253 of 2007 MUNNA PRASAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4. 2.9.2008. This application has been preferred against the order dated 18.1.2007 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur, Ara in Misc.( Maintenance )Case No. 274 of 2004/50 of 2005 thereby the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.1500/- to opposite party no. 2 and 1000/- to opposite party no.3. Opposite party no. 2 is the wife and opposite party no. 3 is the daughter of the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the impugned order. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the real fact is that opposite parties are living in the house of this petitioner and actually they have ousted the petitioner from his house. It is further submitted that the petitioner is still ready to keep opposite parties and maintain them properly. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties submits that the - 2 - petitioner alleged charge of adultery against opposite party no. 2 which was not proved and for this reason she is not willing to live with the petitioner. Considered the submission of learned counsel for both the parties as well as the grounds mentioned in the impugned order granting maintenance to the opposite parties. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no merit in this application. However, the quantum of maintenance granted to the opposite parties is excessive. Opposite parties are living in the house of the petitioner. It is, therefore, ordered that the petitioner shall pay maintenance to opposite party nos. 2 and 3 as the rate of 1000/- each instead of Rs.1500/- and 1000/- respectively to the opposite parties as directed by the court below. With the above modification in the quantum of maintenance, this application is dismissed. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)