WASI AKHTAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both sides.

(2.) Petitioner assails the order dated 14th August, 2007, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sasaram, Rohtas in Maintenance Case No. 4/2002, whereby the Applicants (wife, minor daughter and son) have been directed to be paid a sum of Rs. 1,000/- each by way of maintenance. One of the Applicants (son/O.P. No. 4) has been directed to be paid the said amount with effect from his date of birth, whereas rest two Applicants, namely wife and daughter are to be paid the amount with effect from the date of filing of the application. Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3 approached the court claiming maintenance on the ground that O.P. No. 2 is the legally married wife of the husband (Petitioner). The two Applicants (O.P. Nos. 3 and 4) are daughter and son born out of the wedlock from the Applicant-wife and the Petitioner (husband). They took the plea that the wife was unable to maintain herself and that husband had neglected to maintain the Applicant and her two children. Both the parties were afforded opportunity to adduce evidence. Oral evidence was laid by the parties, Petitioner (husband) took the plea that he had already divorced the Applicant (wife). On a consideration of materials on record, learned trial court came to the conclusion that the story of divorce (Talaque) propounded by the Petitioner was not substantiated. In other words, it was found that the husband was not able to prove that he had already divorced the Applicant-wife in accordance with law. After having found so, learned court below considered different aspects of the matter including capability of the Petitioner to pay maintenance amount. It appears from the order impugned that the Petitioner (husband) took the plea that the wife was earning as a school teacher or taking tuition. It was also alleged that she was running a beauty parlour. Learned trial court found that these pleas taken by the husband was/were not substantiated by any evidence/document adduced/brought on record. The court thus proceeded to consider the capability of the Petitioner to pay the maintenance amount. On a consideration of materials on record, it has been found that the Petitioner had adequate income to pay the maintenance amount to the wife, minor daughter and minor son.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is/was willing to keep the wife with him and to maintain her and his son and daughter. It is contended that there is no finding recorded by learned court below that the Petitioner had neglected to maintain the wife, son and daughter.