THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.3817 of 2009 (Dated : 10-11-2009) Between: Reddy Ramakrishna Reddy R/o Ramavaram, Kothagudem, Khammam District …Petitioner A n d Reddy Bharani W/o Reddy Ramakrishna Reddy Jammigadda, Suryapet,Nalgonda District. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.3817 of 2009 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 20-2-2009 passed in I.A.No.141 of 2009 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem, Khammam District, whereby and whereunder, the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge allowed the application filed by the respondent- wife partly and directed the petitioner-husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month from the date of the petition. 2. Brief facts of the case, giving raise to filing of the C.R.P., by the husband in M.O.P.121 of 2008 are: - The petitioner herein is the husband of the respondent. The wife filed M.C.No.21 of 2003 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Suryapet seeking maintenance to herself and her son. The learned Magistrate granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- to the wife and Rs.1,500/- to the son. The petitioner-husband filed M.O.P.No.121 of 2008 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem seeking for dissolution of the marriage. While so, the wife filed I.A.No.141 of 2009 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking a direction to the husband to pay Rs.5,000/- per month to her and her son towards interim maintenance till disposal of M.O.P.No.121 of 2008. The husband filed counter resisting the application. The husband stated in the counter that the wife is an employee working as Anganwadi teacher since two years at Jammigadda, Suryapet and drawing an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month and therefore she is self sufficient. 3. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, on a consideration of the material brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the parties, proceeded to direct the husband to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- towards interim maintenance apart from the maintenance allowed in M.C.No.21 of 2003, by order dated 20.2.2009. 4. Assailing the order dated 20.02.2009 passed in I.A.No.141 of 2009, the petitioner-husband filed this revision. He also moved C.R.P.M.P.No.5270 of 2009 seeking interim suspension of the order impugned in the C.R.P. An interim order came to be granted on 19.8.2009. 5. The respondent-wife entered appearance through a counsel and filed C.R.P.M.P.No.6885 of 2009 with a prayer to vacate the interim order. 6. When the vacate stay petition came up for consideration, with the consent of counsel appearing for the parties, the revision is taken up for final disposal. 7. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the order impugned in the revision. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-husband submit that the respondent-wife is working as Anganwadi teacher and drawing a salary of Rs.3,000/- per month and she is self-sufficient, and therefore, there is no need to award any further interim maintenance in I.A.No.141 of 2009 in M.O.P.No.121 of 2008. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife submits that the petitioner-husband has not placed any evidence to speak of the respondent- wife earning Rs.3,000/- per month and in the given facts and circumstances, the order passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge does not warrant interference. 10. Indisputably, the respondent-wife is getting monthly maintenance of Rs.2,000/- by virtue of the order in M.C.No.21 of 2008. It is also not in dispute that the son has been granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,500/- per month in the said M.C. It is the version of the respondent-wife that the maintenance granted to her in M.C is not sufficient, and therefore, she moved an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking direction to the husband to pay further sum of Rs.5,000/-. 11. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner- husband that the petitioner-husband is earning only Rs.10,000/- per month and he has other commitments which he has to fulfill. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances, I deem it appropriate to reduce the quantum of maintenance granted by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem in I.A.No.141 of 2009 from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.1,500/- per month. 13. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly allowed in part reducing the maintenance allowed to the respondent-wife and her child from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.1,500/- per month. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.10-11-2009 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.3817 of 2009 (Dated : 10-11-2009)