HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRL.R.C.NO.304 OF 2010 Dt.23.2.2010 Between: Mukthinoothalapati Venkatarao ..Appellant And Mukthinoothalapati Venkateswari and another ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRL.R.C.NO.304 OF 2010 ORDER: (Per Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) This criminal revision case is directed against the order, dated 3.1.2006 in Crl.M.P.No.1502 of 2005 in M.C.No.39 of 1996 on the file of the III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada. The petitioner herein is the husband. The first respondent wife filed said M.C.No.39 of 1996 seeking for payment of maintenance initially at the rate of Rs.500/- per month. Originally she was granted an amount of Rs.200/- per month towards maintenance and the same was enhanced to Rs.500/- vide orders dated 16.4.2004 in Crl.M.P.No.4090 of 2000. Thereafter, Crl.M.P.No.1502 of 2005 was filed in the said M.C. seeking to enhance the monthly maintenance amount from Rs.500/- to Rs.2500/- per month. The court below after considering the evidence available on record and taking into account the salary of the husband as he was getting salary of Rs.5000/- at that time, enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs.500/- to Rs.1500/- per month by order dated 3.1.2006. Aggrieved by the same, the husband filed the present criminal revision case. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-husband submits that the said enhancement of maintenance amount is against the spirit of the main order passed in M.C.No.39 of 1996 and the learned Magistrate ought not to have enhanced the maintenance amount in a maintenance case filed in 1996 and therefore the maintenance amount is liable to be paid as per un-amended Section 125 Cr.P.C., prior to 24.9.2001 and the mother and sister of the petitioner are also depending on him and therefore the said amount is liable to be reduced. To order maintenance amount in favour of the wife, the wife is entitled to maintenance amount depending upon the means of the husband and the requirements of the wife to live. The learned Magistrate depending upon the means and the salary drawn by the husband initially granted Rs.200/-, which was enhanced to Rs.500/- and as the salary of the husband was increased to Rs.5000/- and after taking into account the necessary expenses incurred by the husband, the maintenance amount was enhanced from Rs.500/- to Rs.1500/- per month. Under Section 127 Cr.P.C., the monthly maintenance amount can be enhanced from time to time depending upon the changed circumstances. Therefore, we are unable to accept the aforesaid contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner- husband. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the said enhancement of maintenance amount from Rs.500/- to Rs.1500/- per month is just and proper keeping in view of the salary drawn by the husband and therefore it cannot be said that the said amount is excessive or exorbitant. The court below has rightly enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs.500/- to Rs.1500/- per month. We do not see any ground to interfere with the order impugned. The criminal revision case is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. ________________ B.N.RAO NALLA, J. 23.2.2010 kpr