HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2446 of 2008 ORDER: The Petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 28.12.2007 passed in Crl.R.P.No.28 of 2006 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa, confirming the order dated 22.05.2006 passed in M.C. No.4 of 2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jammalamadugu, Kadapa. 2. For the first time the matter was listed on 24.04.2008 and thereafter on 25.04.2008, on which day this Court ordered notice to respondents 1 and 2. Thereafter, this matter did not see the light of the day and for the first time this matter is listed before me today. Hence it is clear that the petitioner has not evinced any interest in the matter. 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that respondents 1 and 2 herein, who are the minor son and wife of the petitioner herein, filed M.C.No.4 of 2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jammalamadugu, Kadapa, seeking maintenance of Rs.2,000/- per month to the second respondent herein and Rs.1,000/- per month to the first respondent herein. The court below, after hearing both sides and considering both the entire evidence, by an order dated 22.05.2006, allowed the maintenance case directing the petitioner herein to pay Rs.1,000/- per month to each of respondents 1 and 2 towards maintenance. Questioning the said order, the petitioner filed Crl.R.P.No.28 of 2006 on the file of the District Sessions Judge, Kadapa. The learned Sessions Judge partly allowed said revision petition on 28.12.2007 by setting aside the grant of maintenance in favour of the second respondent herein and dismissing the same with costs in respect of the first respondent herein. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed this criminal petition. 4. The amount of maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month awarded by the court below to the first respondent-minor child is meager. In these hard days, it is very difficult for the first respondent to maintain himself with the said amount. 5. In the circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned orders. The Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed. _____________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) date: 26.04.2010 va