THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL NO. 1273 OF 2011 DT.18.11.2011 Between: Yanireddy Radha Appellant And Yenireddy Nagireddy … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri G.L. Nageswara Rao Counsel for respondent: The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL NO. 1273 OF 2011 ORDER: This Second Appeal is filed against the decree and judgment dated 26.2.2008 in A S No. 76 of 2006 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Guntur confirming the judgment and decree dated 17.1.2005 in O.S. No. 218 of 2002 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur. The appellant- plaintiff is wife of the respondent-defendant. She filed a suit in O S No. 218 of 2002 claiming past and future maintenance at the rate of Rs.1500/- to herself and Rs.1000/- each to plaintiffs 2 and 3 and to create a charge over the schedule property for its realization. The trial Court on consideration of the matter, by its judgment partly decreed the suit granting maintenance of Rs.500/- per month to plaintiffs 2 and 3 and rejected the claim of the first plaintiff and created a charge over the suit schedule property upto the share of the defendant in those properties. Aggrieved by the said judgment insofar rejecting her claim, the first plaintiff preferred an appeal in A.S No. 76 of 2006 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Guntur. The lower appellate Court on reappreciation of the matter, dismissed the appeal on the ground that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant is having considerable income to consider the case of the plaintiff for grant of maintenance. Questioning the said order, the present Second Appeal is filed. Heard the learned counsel for appellant and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the plaintiff is getting a maintenance of Rs.400/- per month in terms of the orders passed in maintenance case in M.C. No. 11 of 2001 on the file of the IV Additional Munsif Magistrate Court, Guntur. This Court is of the opinion that it is always open for the plaintiff/appellant herein to file an appropriate application in the said maintenance case No. 11 of 2001 to modify its order and to raise her maintenance by establishing the financial status and means of her husband to pay more maintenance. However, in the present second appeal, there is no substantial question of law that arise for consideration and this Court do not see any reason to differ with the concurrent findings arrived at by the Courts below. In the result, the Second Appeal is dismissed, however, the appellant- plaintiff is at liberty to file an appropriate application for enhancement of maintenance in M.C. No. 11 of 2001. No costs. _____________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 18.11.2011 TVK THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL NO. 1273 OF 2011 DT.18.11.2011