Ravi Nath Verma,J. - (1.) The wife and two minor sons of opposite party no.2-Manish Ranjan have preferred this revision against the order dated 22nd February, 2014 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella in Miscellaneous Case No.03 of 2011 with the prayer to enhance the maintenance amount of Rs. 7000/- per month granted by the court below in favour of the petitioner no.1-the wife. However, the amount of maintenance of Rs. 3500/- per month each awarded to the two minor sons, have not been challenged by the petitioner no.1 (the wife).
(2.) The petitioner no.1 along with her two minor sons presented a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code') on 16.03.2011 in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella with the pleadings that her marriage with Manish Ranjan, the present opposite party no.2 was solemnized on 21.02.2003 in the District of Gaya as per Hindu rites and custom. At the time of marriage, huge cash amount, car, jewellery and house hold articles were given to the parents of her husband and after marriage she came to her matrimonial home and lived their peacefully for almost four months but thereafter her in-laws particularly father-in-law and mother-in-law started assaulting her. She came to Hyderabad where her husband was posted in State Bank of Hyderabad. Out of their wedlock, petitioner nos.2 and 3 were born but whenever her in-laws came to Hyderabad, her husband and in-laws used to assault her. Even in presence of the brother of petitioner no.1, she was assaulted by her husband and finally she was driven out of her matrimonial home. She was forced to take shelter in her father's house at Adityapur (Seraikella) along with her two minor children. In the said petition, it is also pleaded that she has no independent source of income and she along with her two children are dependent upon her old parents. She has also filed a complaint case against the opposite party no.2- her husband and in-laws for the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. The two sons are presently studying in St. Xaviers School at Jamshedpur. It is also pleaded that her husband being a senior officer of Scale III in State Bank of Hyderabad, is getting salary of Rs. 65,000/- per month and has sufficient means to maintain her and her two minor children. Hence, she cannot be forced to become burden over the old parents. The in-laws are also not dependent upon their son as after superannuation from the post of Regional Transport Officer her father-in-law has been getting pension of Rs. 25,000/- per month and mother-in-law after her retirement from the post of teacher, is also getting pension of Rs. 10,000/- per month. Besides the above, her husband has approximately Rs. 2,00,000/- annual income from cultivation and Rs. 10,000/- per month as rent from the house at Gaya.
(3.) It appears from the record that even after valid service of notice on the present opposite party no.2 in court below, he preferred not to appear in the court. Where after the order was passed for service of notice through substituted service. Accordingly, notice was published in local newspaper but in spite of that he did not appear in court. The court below then fixed the case for ex-parte hearing on 25.05.2012. But on 11.04.2013, the opposite party appeared in court and prayed to set aside the order of ex-parte hearing. It appears that the order of ex-parte hearing was recalled and the present opposite party was directed to file showcause. In his show-cause, the opposite party (the husband) has not denied his marriage with the petitioner no.1-Sweta Rani and also not denied that the two minor sons are not his sons but alleged that to put legal pressure on him, a case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and other Sections has been filed by his wife. It is also pleaded that it is the wife, who does not want to reside with him though he is still ready to keep and maintain his wife and two children with full dignity and honour, but she is always creating nuisance in the family. It is also pleaded that he is not financially capable to maintain his wife and two sons separately rather he is ready to keep her and two minor sons along with his family members. Hence, the application filed for maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month has no merit.;