IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.440 of 2007 MD.NASSIM @ BUTTU @ NASIM AKHTER S/O MD. RAUF BARI BALA R/O VILL. 27, B.D.C.D. ROAD TENGRA, P.S. TENGRA, KALKUTTA, 15 (BENGAL) --- PETITIONER. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. ROSHAN KHATOON D/O MD. AZIMUDDIN 3. MUNNI KHATOON MINON D/O AZIMUDDIN 4. MD. BASIM @ GONGA MINOR S/O MD. AZIMUDDIN 5. MD. AFROZ, MINOR S/O MD. AZIMUDDIN OPP. PARTY NOS. 3 TO 5 THROUGH THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN ROSHAN KHATOON OF OTHER. --- OPP. PARTIES. For the Petitioner : Mr. Raj Kishore Prasad, Advocate. For the Opp.Parties : Mr.Santosh Kumar Sinha-2, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyaya, APP. ----------- 07. 25.06.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioner, who is husband, has assailed the order dated 05.01.2007, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Biharsharif, Nalanda, in Maintenance case no. 28(M) of 2002, whereby, on consideration of the materials on record, petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1000/- (one thousand) per month to the opposite party no.1, and Rs. 500/- ( five hundred) per month to each children ( opposite party nos. 3 to 5). Learned counsel for the petitioner made two-fold submissions. It is contended that the petitioner is prepared to keep his wife with him and maintained her. It is next contended that his own income is inadequate and as such order impugned may be interfered with. Learned counsel for the opposite parties, on the other hand, opposed the prayer. He draws attention of the Court, to the 2 findings recorded at paragraph no. 8, in order to show that the petitioner, who examined himself as D.W.2 candidly stated before the Court ( paragraph no.3) that he is/was not ready at any cost to keep his wife ( petitioner no.1), and the children with him. From paragraph no.9 of the order impugned, it appears that the learned Court below has considered the capability of the petitioner to pay the amount adjudged by the Court. It has been found and held that he runs a rubber factory in Kolkata, and monthly income of the petitioner ranges between twenty five thousand to thirty thousand. This Court finds no merit in the application. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)