- (1.) N. B. Asthana, J. The opposite party No. 2 who is admittedly the wife or the revisionist filed an application under Sec tion 125, Cr. P. C. in the Court of Addl. prin cipal Judge, Kanpur Nagar claiming main tenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 500 per month on the ground of cruelty and deser tion.
(2.) THE revisionist contested the ap plications made by opposite party No. 2 proved and granted her maintenance al lowance at the rate of Rs. 400 per month from the date of application. Aggrieved by it the husband has come to this Court in revision. It is not necessary to go into the facts of the case because in the grounds of revision the judgment of the trial court has not been assailed on merits. It has been attacked on two grounds namely that the amount of maintenance granted is excessive and that it has been granted from the date of application without assigning any reason. According to opposite party No. 2 the revisionist is a gangman and is earning Rs. 1500 per month. This has not been dis puted. In addition he must be getting D. A. Even a class-IV employee of the Central Government who has put in some years of service normally gets about Rs. 2000 nor month. In any case a person earing Rs, 1500 per month can very well Spare Rs. 400 per month for his wife. It would be difficult for a women to keep her body and soul together in less than Rs. 400 per month in these days of soaring prices.
(3.) IN Prem Lata Sahai v. Ram Narain Sahai, 1991 SCC (Criminal) 237 the Supreme Court observed as follows :- "high Court should have shown better awareness of the plight of women and should not have interfered with an order of maintenance passed in favour of the wife by the trial court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. There was no warrant for reducing the amount from Rs. 400 per month to Rs. 350 per month. So also the High Court should not have modified the order of the trial court by directing that maintenance should be paid from the date of order of the trial Court. " In view of the above ruling both the contentions of the revisionist fail.;