R. K. SINGH, J. Heard Mr. A. R. B. Khare, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri B. S. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. For appreciating the matter, learned counsel for the revisionist has been heard on the point of admission/final disposal of the revision petition. 3. In the application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. for maintenance the Court below has allowed the maintenance at the rate of Rs. 350/- per month on the ground of desertion of the wife, opposite party. The submission of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that he became hand icapped during Bhopal Gas tragedy the wife O. P. wilfully deserted the revisionist. Therefore, she is not entitled to get any maintenance. Further his submission is that the interim order of this Court has been complied with and he has deposited Rs. 2,000/- maintenance allowance. Therefore, he is entitled to extend the in terim stay order dated 3-11 -1992. 4. The impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Family Judge, Jhansi dated 31-1-1992 has been carefully perused. At page 9 of the Family Courts judgment while discussing the evidence of the revisionist Dhaniram Kushwaha, the Court has noted that the revisionist has made statement that he is an employee in Bhopal Railway Parcel Office and gets Rs. 834/- per month as salary. Further his sub mission is that his wife, opposite party has got illicit relationship with Kishan Singh, a neighbourer of the revisionist. The state ment of the revisionist is that if the op posite party, wife maintain her good be haviour then he is ready to keep her with him. 5. The statement of the revisionist demolishes the entire argument of Mr. Khare. He took plea in this Court that due to physical handicap of the husband-revisionist the wife/opposite party has deserted the revisionist and she is not en titled to maintenance. On the other hand the stand of the revisionist on oath in his deposition as O. P. W. is that he still con tinues in service and gets Rs. 834/- per month, he is ready to keep his wife subject to good character and behaviour of the wife opposite party. 6. On the perusal of the entire judg ment of the learned Family Judge it shows that there is no satisfactory evidence to prove the allegation of adultery against the opposite party-wife. 834/- per month, he is ready to keep his wife subject to good character and behaviour of the wife opposite party. 6. On the perusal of the entire judg ment of the learned Family Judge it shows that there is no satisfactory evidence to prove the allegation of adultery against the opposite party-wife. Thus the plea of the wilful desertion or adultery does not stand to the reason. 7. The maintenance allowed by the learned Family Judge is only Rs. 350/- per month, which is at best one third of the total monthly salary received by the revisionist. Thus the amount of main tenance is in no way excessive. On any count in the impugned order, there is no illegality or impropriety. The revision petition does not contain merit. The inter im stay order was for limited period which has elapsed about five and half years ago. There is no merit for admission of the revision. Therefore, there is no question for extension of stay. 8. The revision petition is dismissed at the admission stage itself. The revisionist is directed to comply with the direction of the learned Family Judge. However there is no order for cost. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Mr. Kushwaha on his application for communication to the opposite party-wife. The office is directed to send this order alongwith lower Court record to learned Family Judge for information and necessary action. The arrears of main tenance will be paid within one7 year in three instalments. Revision dismissed. .