immediately thereafter, he had married another lady. So the Family Court has rightly found that the wife has sufficient reason not to reside along with the husband. In evidence, the wife has stated that after the divorce, she has been constrained to live in her parental home since 15.12.2011 and she has no source of income and therefore the husband should pay maintenance @ Rs. 10,000/- per month. The wife (P.W-1) has deposed that the husband has income of Rs. 25,000/- per month. The husband (RW-1) has contended that the wife is employed in Mother Care Hospital, Mannarkkad, and she is also doing tailoring work and she is getting income of around of Rs. 10,000/- per month and that therefore she is capable to look after herself. P.W-1 has clearly denied the said contentions in her cross examination and therefore, the burden of proof lies on the husband to prove that the wife is fully capable of financially taking care of herself. Though the husband has deposed that the wife is working as a tailor, he has not given any evidence regarding the place, where she is conducting the tailoring business, etc. After the remand, the husband has examined RW2 and RW3 in his endeavour to prove his contentions that the wife is doing tailoring business. RW2 has stated that P.W-1 (wife) is working as a tailor in the tailoring shop, by name
