Md. Mumtaz Khan, J. - (1.) The instant revision has been preferred by the petitioner/wife assailing the judgment and order dated January 04, 2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Haldia, Purba Medinipur in M. Case No. 82/2014 on the ground of inadequacy of the quantum of maintenance allowance.
(2.) The facts leading to the instant revision is that the petitioner failed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.) against opposite party no.2/husband praying for maintenance allowance from him for herself and her minor child before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Haldia, Purba Medinipur which was registered as M. Case No. 82 of 2013 and thereafter it was then transferred to the court of Judicial Magistrate at Haldia. Opposite party no.2/husband appeared and contested the same by filing written statement and after recording the evidence of the parties and after hearing application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C was allowed on contest and opposite party no.2 was directed to pay Rs.1000/- per month to the petitioner for herself and Rs.1000/- per month for her minor son as maintenance allowance from the date of the order.
(3.) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same petitioner has preferred the instant revision on the ground of inadequacy of the quantum of maintenance allowance taking the plea that the learned Court below failed to consider that the opposite party no.2 is practicing advocate of the High Court at Calcutta and such meager amount is not sufficient for her and her child's maintenance.;