Nikhil Balaji @ Balaprasad Mandhane v. Ranjita W/O. Nikhil Mandhane And Another
2025:BHC-AUG:35344 ( 1 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 939 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 292 OF 2022 NIKHIL BALAJI @ BALAPRASAD MANDHANE
VERSUS
RANJITA W/O. NIKHIL MANDHANE AND ANOTHER .....
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Ashtekar Raviprasad K. .....
CORAM :
Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.
DATE :
12.12.2025 P.C.:- 1.
In spite of service the non-applicants have failed to appear. 2.
Heard advocate Mr. Ashtekar the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revision applicant.
3.
Having regard to the submissions canvassed on behalf of the revision applicant, I have gone through the record. By the present revision, the applicant takes exception to the order dated 22.06.2022 passed by the Family Court, Latur in Petition E-7/2022, whereby maintenance amount of Rs.4,000/- per month was granted in favour of the non-applicant no.1 and Rs.2500/- was granted in favor of the non-applicant no.2 from the date of the petition i.e. 21.01.2020.
( 2 ) 4.
On face of record it prima facie appears that, on 12.06.2015 marriage between the applicant and non-applicant no.1 was solemnized. Out of wedlock, they were blessed with a child i.e. non-applicant no.2. The nonapplicant no.1 alleged in her petition that, after marriage she cohabited with her husband, however, she was subjected to cruelty on demand of dowry. After settlement of matrimonial dispute on 03.09.2016, she cohabited with present applicant but again she was subjected to cruelty. Lastly, she was driven out of her matrimonial house with the minor child. The non-applicant is having no source of income and she is unable to maintain herself and the child. The present applicant/ori. non-applicant is working as a truck driver with Sandesh Gas Co. Chakan, Pune, and drawing salary of Rs.40,000/- per month, hence, prayed for maintenance.
5.
The present applicant/ori. non-applicant no.1 filed reply at Exh.20 and has resisted the application. He admitted about solemnization of marriage and paternity of present non-applicant no.2, however, he denied about raising ill-treatment against the non-applicant no.1. The present applicant further contended that, the non-applicant no.1 is M.A. M.Ed. She is running tuition classes and drawing income of Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/- per month, hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.
( 3 ) 6.
After conclusion of trial, on 22.06.2022, the learned Family Court, Latur passed the impugned order directing the present applicant to pay maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month to the present non-applicant no.1 and Rs.2500/- to the non-applicant no.2.
7.
On perusal of record it appears that, the present applicant/husband has not denied that he is working as a truck driver with Sandesh Gas Co. Chakan, Pune and drawing monthly salary of Rs.40,000/-. So also, in the year 2016 the present applicant/husband was working as a recovery agent and was drawing income of Rs.9,000/- per month. Since the learned Family Court passed the impugned order considering the monthly income of the present applicant as well as daily needs of the non-applicants and granted maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month for the present nonapplicant no.1 and Rs.2500/- to the non-applicant no.2. Therefore, the impugned order is not excessive and no illegality is found in it. 8.
In view of above, no substantial grounds are set out to interfere with the findings recorded by the Court below. Hence, the revision application is dismissed.
[Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.] mubashir