Baby G.Manasa v. G.Ravindernath Gupta

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE P. KESHAVA RAO CRI MI NAL REVI SI ON CASE NO. 1706 OF 2011 ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent No.1.

2.

The present Criminal Revision Case is filed against the orders passed in M.C.No.444 of 2008 dated 13.7.2011 on the file of the Court of the Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy district, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, seeking enhancement of the maintenance.

3.

The facts in brief are that the mother of the petitioner herein is the legally wedded wife of respondent No.1. Their marriage was performed on 11.8.2011. Out of the wedlock, the petitioner was born on 19.5.2002. However, disputes arose between the mother of the petitioner and respondent No.1 herein, leading to separation. The specific allegation made against respondent No.1 is that he was harassing the mother of the petitioner for additional dowry and subjected her to cruelty. Respondent No.1 is working at Hyderabad and got a own flat at Gowthamnagar, Dilsukhnagar. In those circumstances, the petitioner, represented by her natural guardian i.e., mother, filed the above said maintenance case claiming a sum of Rs.5,000/- p.m. towards maintenance. Respondent No.1 filed

counter and denied the material allegations made in the maintenance case. While admitting the relationship, he stated that he never neglected the petitioner herein or his wife. In fact, he is depositing a sum of Rs.500/- p.m. in the name of his daughter i.e., the petitioner herein in the District Co-operative Central Bank Limited, Mahaboobnagar.

4.

Learned Judge, Family Court, after hearing the matter, allowed the maintenance case directing respondent No.1 to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- p.m. towards maintenance. Aggrieved by the same, the present Criminal Revision Case is filed. 5.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed a xerox copy of the order passed in O.P.No.789 of 2012 dated 14.3.2015 before this Court and would contend that during the pendency of the present Criminal Revision Case in this Court, there was a compromise between the petitioner and respondent No.1 in O.P.No.789 of 2012 where under respondent No.1 agreed to pay Rs.5,000/- p.m. towards maintenance to the petitioner herein from the date of the order in the said O.P.

6.

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that it is agreeable to respondent No.1 to pay the maintenance as agreed upon in O.P.No.789 of 2012.

7.

Having heard both the counsel and from the perusal of the material on record particularly, the orders passed in O.P.No.789 of 2012, the present Criminal Revision Case is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- p.m. towards maintenance to the petitioner from the date of the order in O.P.No.789 of 2012 i.e., 14.3.2015, till the petitioner is married.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________ P. KESHAVA RAO,J Date: 26.9.2018 KPM