and his wife by doing coolie work earning income and further considering that his elder brother is providing Rs.2,000/ - p.m. to his parents towards medical expenses, granted monthly maintenance of Rs.1,500/ -. On a careful perusal of the order, I find no illegality or irregularity therein. As rightly observed by the trial Court, the parents of the petitioner are aged people of more than 75 years. At this age, his father for want of maintenance is pulling rickshaw. Both the brothers are residing in two portions of the house of respondent No. 2 which was granted by Government to the latter. In these circumstances, the petitioner certainly owes responsibility along with his elder brother to maintain their parents. It emerges in the impugned order that his elder brother is paying Rs.2,000/ - to his parents towards medical expenditure. Therefore, the petitioner has to pay some amount towards his contribution. Even according to his own admission, the petitioner and his wife are earning Rs.200/ - per day if not Rs.300/ - per day as observed by the trial Court. The petitioner and his wife are residing in a portion of the house belonging to his father without paying any rent. If the petitioner and his wife stay in a rented accommodation, certainly they have to pay rent of Rs.1,500/ - to Rs.2,000/ - p.m. to owner. In that view of the mater, the trial Court's awarding Rs.1,500/ - p.m. as maintenance against the petitioner herein cannot be termed as illegal or unjust. So, at any rate, the impugned order does not suffer from the vice of illegality or irregularity. Considering the same, the criminal revision case is dismissed by confirming the order of the trial Court.
