IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Wednesday, the 29th day of June, 2011 Present: Hon’ble Sri Justice N. Ravi Shankar Crl.R.C..No. 1358 of 2011 Between: C. Balraj …Petitioner and C. Andalu and another …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Crl.R.C..No. 1358 of 2011 Judgment Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioner herein is admittedly the husband of the first respondent. The order of the Family Court, Secunderabad would show that the petitioner again married the younger sister of the first respondent and begot children through her also, though he had earlier three children with the first respondent. It is also seen from the trial court order that all the six children are grownup, married and this is admitted by the petitioner’s counsel also. In the maintenance case in question filed by the first respondent the trial court fixed monthly maintenance of Rs.4,000-00 having regard to the salary of the petitioner, which was fixed at Rs.13,577-00. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued at length that the first respondent got some property from the petitioner’s father and the trial court discussed on this aspect and held that there was no evidence to uphold that claim of the petitioner. A perusal of the order of the trial court would show that it considered all the aspects and fixed the monthly maintenance at Rs.4,000-00. It is now contended that even Rs.4,000-00 per month is on high side having regard to the salary of the petitioner, but it may be noted that all the children of the petitioner through both his wives are stated to be grownup and married also. In these circumstances, the order of the trial court in my view does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. 4. Accordingly this revision case is dismissed at the admission stage. _____________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J. June 29, 2011. *BVS