IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR F.C.A.No.168 of 2011 Between: T.Ravi ..... APPELLANT AND T.Lakshmi Devi and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR F.C.A.No.168 of 2011 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) The appellant is the husband of the 1st respondent and father of the 2nd respondent. The respondents herein filed O.S.37/2002 on the file of the Judge, Family Court-cum-V Addl.District Judge, Tirupati claiming maintenance from the appellant herein @Rs.2,000/- per month to each of them towards food, Rs.1,000/- per month towards shelter, Rs.2,000/- perm annum towards clothing, Rs.5,000/- per annum towards utensils and Rs.500/- per annum towards medical expenses. The said suit was decreed partly, holding that the 1st respondent/1st plaintiff is entitled to maintenance @Rs.2,000/- per month and the 2nd respondent/2nd plaintiff is entitled to maintenance @Rs.1,000/- per month which includes the maintenance granted earlier in MC.35/1995 and thus, in all, only Rs.3,000/- was granted towards maintenance per month in favour of respondents herein. It was the contention of the respondents/plaintiffs before the Court below that the appellant herein was drawing salary of Rs.9,500/- per month and also he is having cash of Rs.5 lakh and doing money lending business, whereas the respondents/plaintiffs have no independent source of income, and therefore, they are entitled to the said maintenance amount. As there was no dispute with regard to getting of monthly salary by the appellant/defendant @ Rs.9,500/- per month, the Court below granted maintenance to the respondents, as stated supra. Aggrieved by the order of the Court below dated 07.12.2007 the appellant/defendant filed this appeal. This Court by order dated 03.08.2010 granted interim stay on condition of the appellant deposits a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards maintenance to the wife and Rs.500/- towards maintenance to the son for every month. To vacate the said order, the respondents/plaintiffs filed FCA MP No.323/2011. We have passed an order in that MP on 25.07.2011 stating that it is desirable to hear the main case itself at the interlocutory stage. That is how, this matter has came up for hearing today. Heard both the counsel. It is the case of the respondents/plaintiffs that in fact the appellant is now drawing salary of Rs.22,078/- per month, he being employee of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, working as Junior Assistant. We have perused the salary slip which indicates that the total earnings of the appellant is Rs.22,078/-after deductions of Rs.3,761/-, he is getting net salary of Rs.18,317/- per month. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the grant of maintenance by the Court below to the respondents/plaintiffs, as stated supra, is reasonable and it cannot be said that the same is excessive and exorbitant. We do not see any grounds to interfere with the findings of the Court below. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. It is needless to mention that it is open for the respondents/plaintiffs to recover the arrears of the maintenance from the appellant/defendant, as ordered by the Court below. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ___________________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR,J Dated: 27.07.2011 Dsr