G. Vijayasekaran, Age 34 Years v. S. Vidya,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.11.2016

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.T. SELVAM Crl.R.C.No.1137 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.No.9944 of 2016 G.Vijayasekaran .. Petitioner Vs.

1.S.Vidya 2.Minor V.Keshav Sai rep. by his mother S.Vidya .. Respondents Criminal Revision filed under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. against the order passed by the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore in M.C.No.168 of 2015 dated 28.07.2016. For Petitioner:

Mr.P.Paramasiva Doss For Respondents: Mr.B.Vijayakumar

O R D E R

This revision arises against the order passed by the learned Additional Family Judge, Coimbatore in M.C.No.168 of 2015 dated 28.07.2016 wherein, the Court below has directed payment of Rs.5000/- to the first respondent/wife and Rs.10,000/- to the second respondent/minor child. 2.Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondents.

3.Learned counsel for petitioner submits that first respondent/wife earns more than Rs.30,000/- per month and as such, alimony directed by the Court below at Rs.5000/- is unjustifiable. He would submit that in the order of the Court below in M.C.No.168 of 2015 dated 28.07.2016, it is observed that the petitioner deserted the respondent/wife and such observation caused great prejudice to the petitioner, who had filed HMOP seeking divorce.

4.Learned counsel for respondents submit that petitioner husband is earning a sum of Rs.80,000/- per month and the order of the Court below does not suffer from any irregularity and prays for dismissal of the petition.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5.Provision for maintenance is not dependent only on the earning capacity of the claimant/respondent wife, it is also towards sustaining the standard of living as a couple. This Court sees no room for interference with the order of the Court in M.C.No.168 of 2015 dated 28.07.2016 and hence, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed.

6.However, having regard to the submission of the learned counsel for petitioner that the observation of the Court below to the effect that the petitioner has deserted the respondent/wife, would cause great prejudice to the petitioner in HMOP.No.3504 of 2015, on the file of the Family Court, Chennai which is now transferred to the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore and wherein, the petitioner has sought a decree of divorce on ground of desertion and cruelty on the part of the respondent/wife, this Court would observe that the Court dealing with HMOP seeking divorce, shall arrive at a decision solely on merits without in any way being influenced by any of the observations made by the Court below in M.C.No.168 of 2015 dated 28.07.2016. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS VII ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar DP To The Additional Family Court, Coimbatore.

1 cc to Mr.B. Vijayakumar, Advocate Sr. 64845 Crl.R.C.No.1137 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.No.9944 of 2016 NM (CO) kk 29/12 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/