THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2250 of 2010 (Dated : 03-12-2010) Between: Kancherakunta Venkat Reddy ..Petitioner A n d Kancharakunta Jaya Laxmi and others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2250 of 2010 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 18.8.2009 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1545 of 2008 in M.C.No.25 of 2005 on the file of the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate, Special Mobile Court, Nalgonda. 2. The respondents 1 and 2 herein are the wife and son of the petitioner. They filed M.C.No.25 of 2005 claiming maintenance against the petitioner herein. Their application came to be allowed granting maintenance to them at the rate of Rs.1,000/- and Rs.600/- respectively. Subsequently, they filed Crl.M.P.No.1545 of 2008 under Section 127 Cr.P.C seeking enhancement of monthly maintenance. The wife herself got examined as Pw-1 and marked one document as Ex.P-1. The husband got examined himself as Rw-1 besides examining one Dodlapati Prathap Reddy as Rw-2. The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the parties, enhanced maintenance granted to the wife from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.1,500/- and from Rs.600/- to Rs.1,000/- to son, by order dated 18.8.2009. The said order is assailed in this revision. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the order impugned in the revision. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the trial Court enhanced maintenance without there being any evidence and therefore, the order impugned in the revision is liable to be set aside. 5. I have gone through the order impugned in the revision. Originally, maintenance was granted to the wife at the rate of Rs.1,000/- and at the rate of Rs.600/- to the son in the year 2006. Two years thereafter, the wife and son filed Crl.M.P.No.1545 of 2008 seeking enhancement of maintenance. The learned Magistrate considered the evidence of Pw-1 and Rws.1 and 2 and proceeded to enhance maintenance from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.1,500/- to the wife and from Rs.600/- to Rs.1,000/- to the son by giving cogent and convincing reasons. The total enhanced amount comes to Rs.900/- to the wife and son, put together. The enhancement appears to be quite reasonable and it cannot be said to be on high side. Therefore, I do not see any valid ground to interfere with the order impugned in the revision. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY ,J Dt.03-12-2010 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2250 of 2010 DATED : 03-12-2010