1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CRI. REVN. APPLN. NO.: 147 OF 2009 Shri Rajendra S/o Abhimanyu More Versus Suvarna W/o Rajendra More and another *** Mrs. Asha D. Rakh, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. N. R. Jamdhade, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mrs. B. R. Khekale, A.P.P. for the Respondent/ State. *** CORAM: K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED: 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2009. 1. Heard. Rule. By consent, the matter is finally heard and decided. The grant of maintenance to the wife, at the rate of Rs.1,500/- is subject of criticism. The counsel submits that the address mentioned in the petition does not incorporate jurisdiction to the Court. The second ground is, in similarly placed situation, Criminal Misc. Application NO.25 of 2005 was moved by the wife for maintenance which has been turned down and consequently on the same facts there should not have been subsequent petition. 2. The wife states that her brother is residing at Aurangabad. There is certificate to this effect and 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. consequently the jurisdiction of family court is involved. The learned Judge was right to accept this contention. 3. Then comes about earlier petition. The learned Judge in para 13 has stated that there was nothing before him to show that earlier petition and subsequent petition is on identical facts and circumstances and he consequently negatived the contention. 4. The income of the husband is not in controversy. The brother of the wife Kishore is residing at Aurangabad, on account of service. Documentary evidence supported the learned Judge to record a positive finding, that the wife was residing at Aurangabad, within the territorial jurisdiction of the family Court. The learned Judge, on analysis of evidence, found that the wife has no any income of independent earning to maintain herself. 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. 5. Considering the fact situation, award of maintenance of Rs.1,500/- was in tune to the income drawn by the husband and no infirmity in the order. No merit in the revision. It is dismissed. Rule discharged. [K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.] Dated:22/09/2009. ans/147