- (1.)AS common question of law and facts arise in both these Revision Applications and as such they are cross Revision Applications between the same parties, both these applications are heard, decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order.
1.1 RULE so far as Criminal Revision Application No.28 of 2012 and Shri Vaibhav Vyas, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties, present applications are taken up for final hearing today.

(2.)CRIMINAL Revision Application No.28 of 2012 has been preferred by the applicant herein ­ original opponent ­ husband challenging the impugned order dated 24.11.2011 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No.2, Ahmedabad in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.525 of 2010 by which the learned Judge has directed the applicant herein ­ original opponent ­ husband to pay Rs.10,000/ per month to the respondent herein ­ original applicant ­ wife towards her maintenance under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "CrPC").
2.1 Criminal Revision Application No.161 of 2012 has been preferred by the original applicant ­ wife to enhance the amount of maintenance with a request to modify the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Family Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.525 of 2010 in awarding Rs.10,000/ per month only to the original applicant wife.

2.2 Shri Kashyap Joshi, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the applicant original respondent ­ husband of Criminal Revision Application No.28 of 2012 and Shri Vaibhav Vyas, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the original applicant ­ wife ­ respondent of Criminal Revision Application No.28 of 2012 and the applicant of Criminal Revision Application No.161 of 2012 and Ms. C.M. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has appeared on behalf of the respondent No.2 ­ State of Gujarat in Criminal Revision Application No.161 of 2012.

At the outset it is required to be noted that the original applicant ­ wife submitted an application under Section 127 of the CrPC before the learned Family Court, Ahmedabad to enhance the amount of maintenance to Rs.15,000/ per month, which was numbered as Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.525 of 2010. That by impugned judgment and order, the learned Family Court has awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/ per month to the original applicant ­ wife towards her maintenance enhancing the amount of maintenance from Rs.500/ to Rs.10,000/ per month.

(3.)TODAY when the present Revision Applications are heard, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective parties, under the instructions from their respective clients have stated at the Bar that the original opponent ­ husband shall pay Rs.7500/ per month to the original applicant wife towards her maintenance from the date of submission of the Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.525 of 2010 and that the original applicant wife has agreed to accept the same. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties have therefore, requested to modify the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court accordingly and to dispose of the present Revision Applications.
4.1 Learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties do not invite any further reasoned order while modifying the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Family Court to the aforesaid extent.