IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.RC.No. 1105 OF 2010 Between: Bonkuri Bala Venkateshwarlu ..... Petitioner V/s. Bonkuri Bala Usha & 3-Ors. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Syed Khader Mastan Counsel for the Respondents: Addl.Public Prosecutor The Court made the following : (Order follows 2nd page) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.RC.No. 1105 OF 2010 O R D E R : This Revision Petition is filed by father against order dated 12-3-2010 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Guntur in MC.No. 58 of 2009 by which the lower court granted maintenance of Rs.2000/- per month to one minor daughter and Rs.1500/- per month to the minor son. No maintenance was granted to their mother, who claims to be wife of the petitioner herein on the ground that her marriage with the petitioner herein is a bigamous one, as first wife of the petitioner is living. In spite of marriage between the petitioner and mother of the respondents 2 and 3 is found to be invalid as it is a bigamous marriage between them, undoubtedly children born to them are legitimate children and they are certainly entitled for maintenance from the petitioner under section 125 Cr.P.C. In the lower court, the petitioner did not deny his parentage of the respondents 2 and 3 herein. 2. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that the petitioner is working as X-Ray Operator in Government Hospital and he is getting net salary of Rs.7000/- and odd and that he has to maintain his first wife, who is suffering from kidney trouble and also his two children born through his first wife and that therefore quantum of maintenance awarded to the respondents 2 and 3 is excessive. Maintenance of Rs.2000/- and Rs.1500/- per month awarded to the minor daughter and the minor son respectively works out at Rs.67/- and Rs.50/- per day to each of them respectively. The said amounts are bare minimum required in these days of inflation for day-to-day maintenance and education of the two minor children. As X-Ray Operator in Government Hospital, the petitioner gets more than Rs.15,000/- per month as gross salary apart from other special allowances as he is working in precarious conditions near X-Ray plant. Therefore, having regard to income of the petitioner, maintenance amount awarded to the respondents 2 and 3 is not in any way is excessive or unreasonable. I see absolutely no merits in this revision petition. 3. Hence, the revision petition is dismissed. ____________________________________ Justice Samudrala Govindarajulu.. 15-06-2010. I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.RC.NO. 1105 OF 2010 Circulation Entry No. 2 3 Date: 15-06-2010 COMPUTER No. 43 Court Master: I s L