VIRENDRA SINGH, J. - (1.) SMT . Urmila Devi has preferred this Criminal Revision against the impugned order dated 22.11.2005 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Bareilly in Criminal Misc. Application No. 1613/2003 for enhancement of maintenance as per provisions under Section 127, Cr.P.C, insofar as it relates to enhancing the quantum of maintenance and directing O.P. No. 2 Sri Brij Mohan Lal to pay merely a sum of Rs. 1,500 per month against the claim of enhancement of maintenance made by the revisionist to the tune of Rs. 15,000 per month.
(2.) I have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is contended on behalf of the revisionist that admittedly in view of the material evidence brought on record, OP No. 2 had taken voluntary retirement from the post of Manager in Allahabad Bank and accordingly, undrr the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, he had received ex-gratia payment to the tune of Rs. 10,00,973.68, gratuity to the tune of Rs. 2,99,325 and contributory fund to the tune of Rs. 6,40,754 on 31.5.2001. Apart from this, the opposite party is having 40 bighas of agricultural land in his name. Not only this, rather he is also having regular income of Rs. 50,000 per month from the sale of building material besides other investments, i.e. fixed deposits in the name of his two sons from his said second wife and other landed property which was recently purchased by him on 2.1.2004. On the contrary, the revisionist is not having any source of income of her own, nor she had anything in her name except one dilapidated and small house constructed over 40 sq. yard which was given to her by her father and that was the only place where she had taken shelter ever since she was deserted by OP No. 2 in the month of June 1978.
(3.) IT is also contended that earlier there was a ceiling of maximum limit to the extent of Rs. 500 per month for the compensation to be awarded under Section 125, Cr.P.C. and therefore, a sum of Rs. 400 per month was awarded to the revisionist. But with the passage of time, since not only the cost of living has increased, the said monthly maintenance awarded to the revisionist is not sufficient for her maintenance and accordingly, she had moved an application for enhancement of maintenance awarded to her as per provisions of Section 125, Cr.P.C. before the learned Judge, Family Court, Bareilly on 18.12.2003, thereby praying that the earlier maintenance awarded to her @ Rs. 400/- per month may be enhanced and OP No. 2 who was having sufficient money besides other regular sources of income, may be directed to pay monthly maintenance to the revisionist @ Rs. 15,000 per month.;