1 WP 3.11.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3 OF 2011 Mrs. Jyoti Santosh Nair. ... Petitioner. V/s. Mr. Santosh Nair and Anr. ... Respondents. Mr. Shashank C. Thatte for the Petitioner. Mr. A.M. Vernekar for the Respondents. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 7th MARCH 2011. P.C. :- The Petitioner – wife has been granted maintenance pursuant to order dated 19th July 2010 passed by the learned Judge of the Family Court, Mumbai in Interim Application No. 196 of 2008. Learned Judge has directed the payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- for the Petitioner and her two children from the date of the order. 2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that the learned Judge ought to have granted maintenance from the date of application. He also contended that quantum of maintenance is inadequate. 2 WP 3.11.sxw 3. I have considered the provisions of Section 125(2) of Cr.P.C. which go to show that grant of maintenance is from the date of the order as a matter of rule and in a given case it can be granted from the date of the application. It is to be noted that the Respondent has contended that the Petitioner is not married to the Respondent and this factor has been considered by the learned Judge and accordingly, in paragraph 8 of the impugned order, it is observed by the learned Judge that the dispute raised by the Respondent as regards the marriage between the Petitioner and the Respondent and is a ground for not granting maintenance from the date of the application. I am satisfied that the reasons mentioned in this order are sufficient to refuse to grant maintenance from the date of the application. 4. So far as the quantum of maintenance is concerned, learned Judge has observed that the income of the Respondent – husband is Rs.8,000/-. Looking to that aspect of the matter, he has fixed the maintenance of Rs.1,000/-. In my view, the maintenance is not inadequate. If wife wants modification of the order in future, she can move the learned Judge of Family Court for appropriate order. For the reasons mentioned aforesaid, the Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission with no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)