- (1.) R. K. Singh, J. Heard Mr. R. B. Sahai, learned counsel for the revisionist. None appears for the opposite party.
(2.) THE impugned judgment and order dated 15th May, 1993 has been carefully perused. THE judgment and order of the Munsif Magistrate Khaga in case No. 12 of 1991 dated 12-8-1992 giving rise to the revision petition before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Fatehpur has also been carefully perused. The learned Sessions Judge has based his finding on his imagination. The positive evidence of the wife Smt. Umaire Khatoon and her father Shamsul Haq to the effect that the husband has beaten, abused and driven out the revisionist from the house, has not been discussed and rejected by the learned Additional Ses sions Judge, rather he has given his atten tion to the oral suggestion given by the opposite party husband that his father-in-law has 38 Big has of landed property and he is disabled man and his mother-in-law is also a disabled lady so, the learned Addi tional District & Sessions Judge infers that the suggestions given by the husband that the revisionist has left his house only to serve and live with her parents in the parent's house is more convincing than the story given by the revisionist. This na ture of reasoning does not come within the jurisdiction of revision proceedings within the powers of the revisional Court. The revisional Court must appreciate the evidence and the discussions made on the quality of evidence by the trial Magistrate. The reasons given by the learned Addi tional District & Sessions Judge are beyond the scope of the revisional juris diction. The prayer for maintenance is based on the financial capacity of the hus band and tk6 reasons for desertion of the wife and not. maintaining her. These facts have not been properly considered by the revisional Court. Thus the. order passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fatehpur appears beyond jurisdic tion and the decision is improper. The order of the Munsif Magistrate allowing maintenance is convincing and satisfac tory. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Criminal Revision No. 255 of 1992 is set aside and the order of main tenance passed by the Munsif-Magistrate, Khaga is confirmed. The revision is ac cordingly allowed. The office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Munsif-Magistrate, Khaga and the Additional Dis trict & Sessions Judge, II, Fatehpur for information and necessary action. The learned Munsif- Magistrate, Khaga will ensure regular payment of monthly main tenance and he will get the entire arrears of maintenance recovered from the opposite party and pay to the revisionist within three months positively. He must take coercive steps for recovery of entire arrear of maintenance dues. Revision allowed. .;