ORDER : B. Sreenivas Gowda, J. The petitioner-husband has filed this petition challenging the order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bellary, in allowing C. Mis. No. 185 of 2013 filed by his wife u/s 125(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and directing him to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month towards maintenance of his wife. On 31-1-2014 notice was ordered to the respondent subject to petitioner depositing maintenance of Rs. 35,000/- before the Family Court, Bellary on or before 14-2-2014 and ordered to list the petition before Court on 14-2-2014. On 14-2-2014 at the request of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was granted time upto 20-2-2014 to deposit the maintenance amount as ordered by this Court on 31-1-2014 with a condition, failing to do so, petition will be listed on 21-2-2014 as to why it should not be dismissed for not depositing the amount. Accordingly, on 21-2-2014 at the request of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, he was granted time upto this day to deposit the amount and comply the order of this Court dated 31-1-2014. Today, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits, inspite of his instructions petitioner has not deposited the amount. On this ground alone petition is liable to be dismissed. 2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner on merits and perused the impugned order. 3. Wife filed a petition in Cri. Misc. No. 185 of 2013 before the Family Court, Bellary, seeking maintenance of Rs. 6,000/- per month from her husband u/s 125 of Cr. P.C., contending she is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner herein and their marriage was performed on 27-6-2011 and she went to the house of her husband and lived with him at Yemmiganur Village, he looked after her only for a period of one week and thereafter he started harassing her for dowry and completely neglected and refused to maintain her. Therefore, he may be directed to pay Rs. 6,000/- per month towards her maintenance. Husband entered appearance before the Family Court, Bellary and filed statement of objections denying the averments made by his wife in Cri. Misc. No. 185 of 2013, but admitting his matrimonial relationship with the respondent. 4. The wife in support of her claim has examined herself as P.W. 1 and three witnesses as P.Ws. 6,000/- per month towards her maintenance. Husband entered appearance before the Family Court, Bellary and filed statement of objections denying the averments made by his wife in Cri. Misc. No. 185 of 2013, but admitting his matrimonial relationship with the respondent. 4. The wife in support of her claim has examined herself as P.W. 1 and three witnesses as P.Ws. 2, 3 and 4 respectively and has produced wedding card, photo, ROR and copy of charge-sheet which were marked as Exs. P. 1 to P. 8. Husband in support of his case has examined himself as R.W. 1 and two witnesses as R.Ws. 2 and 3 and has produced termination order which was marked as Ex. R. 1. Petitioner-husband admits in his evidence that he is a B.Ed. Graduate and earlier he was working as a teacher at Nandi English Medium School, Badanahatti Village, Bellary Taluk and getting salary of Rs. 8,000/- per month. He has produced Ex. R. 1 to show he has left the job at Nandi English Medium School. But he has not examined the author of Ex. R. 1. However, the Family Court has accepted that he left the job at Nandi English Medium School. RORs produced by the respondent-wife at Exs. P. 3 to P. 7 disclose petitioner-husband has agricultural land standing in his name. The Trial Court holding, petitioner being a graduate of B.Ed. and owning agricultural land has no difficulty to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month towards the maintenance of his wife awarded Rs. 5,000/- per month. Considering the cost of maintenance, educational qualification and land holding of the husband, Family Court is justified in awarding maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- per month to the wife. The petitioner-husband had not shown bona fide in depositing Rs. 35,000/- towards arrears of maintenance as ordered by this Court on 31-1-2014. 5. I have carefully gone through the judgment and order passed by the Family Court and do not find any infirmity or illegality warranting my interference. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed both on the ground of non-compliance of the order of this Court as well as on merits. No order as to costs.