The respondent claimed that the petitioner did not even turn up to visit the new born child. The respondent therefore lodged a complaint in Crime No.105/2017. She claimed that she and her child were need of sum of Rs.20,000/- p.m. towards her maintenance and the petitioner was responsible to pay the said amount. The petitioner did not contest the petition. The respondent was thereafter examined as PW-1 and she marked exhibits as Ex.P1 to Ex.P12, while her father was examined as PW-2. Based on oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court held that the petitioners therein are entitled for a monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- each, total of Rs.10,000/per month. This was challenged by the petitioner in Crl.A.No.122/2009. During the course of the proceedings before the Appellate Court, the petitioner claimed that the child was with him and when the Court enquired the respondent, she admitted that the child was in the custody of the petitioner and that she was not interested to take back the child to her custody. In view of the aforesaid statement, the Appellate Court modified the order of Trial Court and confirmed the order of maintenance only in so far as the respondent is concerned.
