1 Criminal Revision Application No.36/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.36 OF 2010 Jagannath s/o Raghunath Navpute Age 32 years, Occ. Labour, R/o Chikalthana, Mahadeo Mandir Galli, Aurangabad (Police Station, Chikalthana) ... PETITIONER VERSUS Sow. Kavita w/o Jagannath Navpute, Age 28 years, Occ. Household, R/o C/o Fakirrao Sotre, Asegaon, Taluka and District Aurangabad ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri R.S. Sarvadnya, Advocate for petitioner – absent Shri R.D. Bhalerao, Advocate for respondent ..... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 15th March, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Shri Bhalerao, learned counsel representing respondent/ wife. On 5.3.2010, after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner/ husband, notices were directed against the respondent/ wife and in the meantime, stay to the proceedings in execution in Criminal Misc. Application No.37/2009 on condition of deposition of 2 Criminal Revision Application No.36/2010 Rs.7000/- before Family Court, Aurangabad was granted with further direction to deposit 50% of maintenance amount every month. Mr. Bhalerao has a grievance, the amount of Rs.7000/- is paid, however, subsequent directions to pay 50% of maintenance amount on or before 10th day of each month is not adhered to. 2. On 11.8.2010, the revision application was admitted, record and proceedings were called and the date of final hearing was to be fixed by consent. On 23.2.2011, Mr. Sarvadnya, learned counsel for revision petitioner was present. Matter is repeatedly called, Mr. Sarvadnya absent. 3. The matter revolves the amount of maintenance by the Judge of Family Court in terms of enhancement from Rs.500/- per month, granted on 19.6.2003, which was subsequently enhanced to Rs.1000/-, to Rs.2000/- per month by order dated 12.11.2009 effective from 30.5.2009. 4. Before the learned Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad, in Criminal M.A. No.37/2009, after service, the husband appeared on 30.6.2009, sought adjournment for filing reply vide application Exhibit 6, however, thereafter he did not turn nor reply was filed. This made the learned Judge to proceed without such reply by 3 Criminal Revision Application No.36/2010 directions dated 14.10.2009. 5. The matter was even referred to Marriage Conciliator for reconciliation. However, before the Marriage Conciliator parties could not resolve the controversy. It is so informed as per report Exhibit 9. 6. Being so permitted, the wife has tendered her affidavit by way of examination-in-chief below Exhibit 11. She has produced the certified copy of Criminal Misc. Application No.73/2005 and also the revenue record in the form of 7/12 along with list Exhibit 3. 7. The learned Judge of the Family Court perused the affidavit and also the revenue record, which primarily establish that in the name of family of the husband, there is 20 acres of agricultural land having yield of cash crop is situate within the vicinity of Chikalthana, Aurangabad. The learned Judge, on perusal of the record, found that the family of the husband is having a very good yield of income, may be amounting to Rs.2 to 3 Lakhs. Though the wife has stated before the learned Judge that the husband had good earning from milk business and having cloth shop, however, learned Judge did not believe for the reason that there was no such proof tendered by the wife. Considering these aspects of the matter, the 4 Criminal Revision Application No.36/2010 nature of yield and earning that has been made available due to agricultural operations and high rise in the price, I do not see there was any error on the part of the learned Judge for directing an enhancement of amount of maintenance from Rs.500/- to Rs.1000/- and Rs.2000/- a month. The learned Judge has visualized the ground realities coupled with the high rise in the price of commodities and high rise in agricultural yield earned by the husband including price escalation in the immovable properties. 8. The criminal revision application lacks merits, dismissed with costs. Stay vacated. Rule discharged. K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE