HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1896 OF 2009 ORDER: The revision is filed against the order in M.C.No.58 of 2008 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad. 2. The petitioner herein is the respondent in the above M.C., and husband of the 1st petitioner and father of petitioners Nos.2 and 3. 3. The petitioners have claimed maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month to the 1st petitioner and Rs.5,000/- each to petitioners Nos.2 and 3 on the ground that the respondent married the 1st petitioner on 02.05.2002 and at the time of marriage, some dowry and other articles were presented and that the respondent is suffering from AIDS and that the respondent is addicted to bad vices and neglected the wife and the children. The respondent is said to be owning some house property and also working in M/s. Rane Engine Valves Limited and drawing a salary of Rs.20,000/- per month and the wife and children are not able to maintain themselves, consequently, the M.C., was filed. 4. The respondent filed counter contending that the wife left the marital home without any reason and he admitted that he is having AIDS. He further submitted that his wife i.e., 1st petitioner, is working in a private organization and earning Rs.25,000/- per month and whereas the respondent is getting only Rs.6,000/- per month and consequently, the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. After considering the evidence of the wife as PW.1 and the revision petitioner as RW.1 and relying upon Ex.R.1, the lower Court has granted maintenance of Rs.2,000/- each to wife and the children. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision is filed. 6. The point for consideration is whether the petitioners in the M.C., are entitled for maintenance and if so, whether the amount granted by the lower Court is reasonable? 7. POINT: The learned counsel for the revision petitioner contends that there is no dispute about the fact that he is AIDS patient and consequently living together with the wife and children has become impossible to the revision petitioner. His only grievance is that he is only drawing a salary of Rs.6,000/- per month and as can be seen from Ex.R.1 pay slip, though the 1st petitioner was working and earning, the lower Court has not taken into consideration and granted maintenance at Rs.2,000/- each per month to the petitioners, which is excessive. So far as the revision petitioner owning immovable property and getting the rents as alleged by the wife, there is no document. So also, though the wife of the revision petitioner is said to be qualified, there is also no material evidence to show that she was getting any salary or employed anywhere. Therefore, the Court left with Ex.R.1 pay slip, which shows that the revision petitioner was drawing above Rs.8,000/- per month. 8. According to the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, as per the orders of this Court, a sum of Rs.2,500/- per month is being deposited every month by the revision petitioner in spite of the fact that he himself has to undergo medical expenses for treatment. Therefore, taking into consideration the above fact, the quantum of maintenance granted by the lower Court is fixed at Rs.4,000/- per month from this day and confining the amount at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per month as paid earlier till date. Therefore, the future maintenance from this date shall be at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per month i.e., an amount of Rs.1,500/- per month to the wife and Rs.1,250/- each per month to the children. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. _______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date:21.11.2011 INL