THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:5685 OF 2010 DATED:24.12.2010 BETWEEN: BATHINA SURYA PRAKASA RAO. …PETITIONER. AND: BATHINA VIJAYA LAKSHMI …RESPONDENT. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:5685 OF 2010 ORDER: - This revision petition is directed against the order of the Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayawada in I.A.No:117 of 2010 in O.P.No:814 of 2009, dated 9.8.2010. The petitioner herein is the husband and the respondent herein is the wife. The wife has filed an application in I.A.No:117 of 2010 under section 18 of the Hindu Marriages Act seeking a direction to the husband to pay interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- p.m. to her contending that her marriage with the revision petitioner was performed on 29.2.1988 as love marriage and during their wedlock, they were blessed with two children and subsequently, the revision petitioner used to beat her brutally, as a result of which, on her report, a case in Cr.No:658 of 2009 under section 498-A IPC was registered and that the revision petitioner is having moveable and immoveable properties worth Rs.1 crore and he is also doing business in the name and style of Veeranjaneya Auto Financiers and he is earning Rs.50,000/- p.m from the business and the properties and therefore, maintenance may be granted at the rate of Rs.10,000/- p.m. On the other hand, the revision petitioner having admitted the marriage and the paternity, filed the counter before the Court below contending that he paid Rs.3,50,000/- to his first son and paid Rs.2,00,000/- for his 2nd son towards their educational expenses and that the respondent-wife developed illicit intimacy with one Y. Mallikarjunarao and she was also involved in a prostitution case under Section 8 (b) of I.T.P Act and the same was also published in a news paper. Therefore, this petition is liable to be dismissed. The Court below having observed that there is no dispute regarding the marriage and paternity and though the revision petitioner made a serious allegation against his wife, but he cannot deny the maintenance to her unless and until the said allegation is proved, allowed the petition partly granting maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,500/- p.m. to the respondent-wife from the date of filing of the petition. Hence, the present revision is filed by the husband. Heard the learned counsel. The fact that remains undisputed is that the marriage between the revision petitioner and his wife was performed on 29.2.1988 and during their wedlock, they were blessed with two children and subsequently on the allegation that the revision petitioner used to beat the respondent-wife, a case in Cr.No:658 of 2009 under section 498-A IPC was registered. Though serious allegations are made against the respondent- wife as to the alleged adulterous life, but the same can be adjudicated only after a full fledged trial in the main O.P proceedings, but not at this stage of interlocutory proceedings. Therefore, in view of the admitted relationship and the paternity by the revision petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the revision petitioner-husband to maintain the respondent-wife by providing maintenance to her. In this view of the matter, I feel that the Court below is just and proper in awarding the maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,500/- p.m. from the date of the petition and hence, this revision petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed. No costs. However, the Court below is directed to dispose of the O.P. as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ____________________ Justice A.Gopal Reddy Date:24.12.2010 nn. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5685 of 2010 DATED:24.12.2010