THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2224 of 2010 Date:02nd December, 2010 Between: S.Mallikarjun …Petitioner and 1. Smt. Rajeshwari & Anr. …Respondents *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2224 of 2010 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order dated 12.06.2008 passed in M.C.No.54 of 2007 on the file of the Family Court, Secunderabad, whereby and whereunder the learned Judge of Family Court awarded Rs.2,500/- p.m. towards maintenance to the wife. 2. The petitioner and the 1st respondent are husband and wife respectively. The wife filed M.C.No.54 of 2007 on the file of the Family Court, Secunderabad, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- p.m. The husband did not choose to contest the petition filed by the wife. The wife examined herself as PW.1 and examined one G.Nagaraju as PW.2 and marked 4 documents as Exs.A1 to A4. Learned Judge of the Family Court, on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the wife, proceeded to grant maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,500/- p.m. from the date of the petition, by order dated 12.06.2008. The said order is assailed in this revision. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband and learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/wife. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband submits that the trial Court granted maintenance without there being any evidence, and therefore, the order impugned in the revision is liable to be set aide. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/wife submits that the 1st respondent/wife got herself examined as PW.1 besides examining one more witness as PW.2 and the learned Judge of the Family Court considered the material brought on record and granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,500/- p.m. and as the maintenance amount is quite reasonable, the same is not required to be disturbed in this revision. 6. It is a matter of record that the petitioner/husband has not contested the petition filed by the 1st respondent/wife. The wife examined two witnesses and produced 4 documents on her behalf. The learned Judge of the Family Court, on considering the material brought on record, proceeded to grant maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,500/- p.m. to the wife. In fact, the wife, who has been examined as PW.1, stated in her chief-examination that the husband is earning Rs.50,000/- p.m. by running a tent house under the name and style of M/s.Sainath Tent House and also earns Rs.15,000/- p.m. by doing finance business. Keeping in view the evidence adduced by the wife, the learned Judge of the Family Court granted maintenance to the wife at the rate of Rs.2,500/- p.m. The order passed by the learned Judge of the Family Court is based on sound reasons and it does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality warranting interference of this in exercise of powers under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed at the admission stage. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:02nd December, 2010. cs THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2224 of 2010 Date:02nd December, 2010