THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.Nos.1542 AND 1557 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: Since the parties in both these revisions are common and the point involved in these revisions is also one and the same, these two revisions are being disposed of by this common order. Both these Criminal Revision Cases are directed against the order passed in M.C.No.16 of 2009 dated 26.04.2010 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional District Court, West Godavari at Eluru. For the sake of convenience and better understanding of the matter, the parties herein are referred to as husband, wife and daughter. Wife and daughter filed M.C.No.16 of 2009 claiming maintenance from the husband at the rate of Rs.4000/- and Rs.3,000/- per month respectively. Husband contested the said case by filing counter. The trial Court, after an analysis of the entire evidence available on record, allowed the said M.C. by an order dated 26.04.2010, directing the husband to pay maintenance to his wife and daughter at the rate of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.2,000/- per month each from the date of the order. Questioning the said order, the husband preferred Crl.R.C.No.1542 of 2010; wife and daughter preferred Crl.R.C.No.1557 of 2010 claiming enhancement of maintenance from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.4,000/- and Rs.2,000/- to Rs.3,000/- respectively from the date of filing of M.C.No.16 of 2009. Heard both sides and perused the impugned order. The trial Court, on a consideration of the entire material available on record, held that the husband has got sufficient means to pay maintenance to his wife and daughter and accordingly granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.2,000/- per month to the daughter, keeping in view the earning capacity of the husband. The trial Court granted the maintenance amount to the wife and daughter in accordance with the change of circumstances and living conditions, as on the date of the impugned order, as proved by the wife and daughter. The Court below was justified in awarding the said amount. In the light of the above, I am of the view that the trial Court has given sufficient and cogent reasons in granting maintenance amount to the wife and daughter. I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order of the trial Court. Both the Criminal Revision Cases are accordingly dismissed. _______________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 19.10.2010 Gsn.