THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY Crl.P.No.5910/2007 Dt.7-10-2010 Ramulu ..Petitioner V. 1. Katravath Balamma and another ..Respondents The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY Crl.P.No.5910/2007 ORAL ORDER This petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., by the petitioner is filed to quash the orders passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar dt. 22-3-2007 passed in R.P.No.49/2007, whereby and whereunder, revision filed by the first respondent was allowed enhancing the maintenance at Rs.2500/- per month as against Rs.1000/- awarded by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mahabubnagar by order dt. 20-6- 2006 passed in MC No.41/2005. The petitioner herein is the husband of the respondent. He will be hereinafter referred to as “the husband”, and first respondent, who is the wife of the petitioner, will be hereinafter referred to as “the wife”. The wife filed maintenance case before the trial court stating that the husband neglected her; that the husband is having sufficient means to maintain her and she is not able to maintain herself. The husband has not chosen to contest the case by disputing the averments made in the maintenance case filed by the wife. Learned Magistrate after taking into consideration of the evidence adduced by the wife, awarded maintenance at Rs.1000/- per month. Dissatisfied with the fixation of the maintenance, the wife carried the mater in revision before the I Additional Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, being RP No.49/2006. Before the revisional court, the husband though appeared through the counsel has not chosen to file his salary certificate to contradict the version of the wife that the husband is working as Junior Assistant in Co-operative Bank and gets a salary of Rs.10,000/- per month. The revisional court, after considering the pleadings and evidence, rightly enhanced the maintenance to Rs.2500/- per month as against Rs.1000/- per month awarded by the trial court. The discretion exercised by the revisional court does not suffer from any illegality warranting interference by this court. The Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed. ______________ A.GOPAL REDDY,J Dt.7-10-2010 kmr