AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 192 wordsN. Dhinakar, C.J.—The petitioner was ordered to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as maintenance u/s 125 Cr. P. C. to Sunita Devi who is his wife and O. P. No. 2 in this revision Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Family Court the present revision is filed.
The O. P. No 2 was married on 29-4-2002 to the petitioner and thereafter she was living in the house of the petitioner. According to O. P. No 2 as she was subjected to cruelty and torture by the petitioner she left her matrimonial home and that the petitioner has failed and neglected to maintain her. When the petition was filed with the above averment it was taken on file, on notice being served the petitioner appeared before the Family Court. He denied the Allegation but the Family Court, finding that the case of the O. P. No. 2 Sunita Devi to be true, directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 1000/- p.m. as maintenance.
On going through the order I find no irregularity or illegality in the same. The revision is therefore, dismissed as devoid of merit.