T.Prabhakaran v. Minor Niriksith

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15 07.2015 Coram THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE B. RAJENDRAN Criminal Revision Case No. 331 of 2013 T.Prabhakaran .. Petitioner/Respondent

Versus

Minor Niriksith rep. by his mother and next friend Dheepalakshmi .. Respondent/Petitioner Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397(3) and 401 of Cr.P.C. to call for the records of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri on 24.01.2013 in M.C.No.12 of 2009 and to set aside the same.

For Petitioner :

Mr. R.Senthilkumar For Respondent : No appearance

ORDER

Though notice has been duly served on the respondent, there is no representation for the respondent. This Criminal Revision has been filed against the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri on 24.01.2013 in M.C.No.12 of 2009.

2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent's mother was taken place on 17.06.2005. It is her case that some time after the marriage, petitioner demanded dowry and deserted her. In the meanwhile, she was blessed with a child. Petitioner also filed H.M.O.P.No.407 of 2008 before the Sessions Judge, Madurai and the same is pending. She is working as a teacher. Being the mother of the minor child, she filed a petition before the trial court, under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., seeking maintenance of her minor son. After trial, the court below, based on the available evidence partly allowed the petition, whereby, directed the husband/petitioner herein to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month to the minor respondent herein towards maintenance till his life time. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner/husband has come up with the present revision.

3. Mr.R.Senthilkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner was only working pharmacist at the time of ordering maintenance by the court below and he was getting stipend of Rs.14,600/- per month. From that, he has to maintain himself and his age old parents. Hence, the order passed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

by the Court below in ordering maintenance @ of Rs.4,000/- to the minor child is excessive. However, the counsel for the petitioner is fair enough to submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to maintain his only son by paying a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

5. Though elaborate arguments had been advanced, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his arguments only in respect of reducing the maintenance ordered by the court below. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, and considering the fact that the petitioner is the sole bread winner of the family and he has to look after his age old parents and also taking into account the fact that he is also duty bound to look after his only son, I am inclined to modify the order passed by the court below to the following effect:

(i) The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month towards arrears of maintenance from the date of petition till this date to the minor child.

(ii)The petitioner is also directed to continue to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month from the date of this order in future to the minor child on the 5th of every succeeding english calender month. (iii) Failure to comply with any one of the directions, the order passed by the court below shall hold good.

6. With the above observation, this Criminal Revision Petition is partly allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS IV ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar smi To, 1.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri. 2.The Sessions Judge, Madurai.

+1 cc to Mr.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate, Sr.35787. Crl.R.C.No. 331 of 2013 msm(co) kra(04/08) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/