JUDGMENT 1. Challenge in the present application is the judgment and order dated 15.03.2013 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Rajkot in Criminal Misc. Application No.352 of 2011 whereby, the learned Family Judge has awarded amount of maintenance of Rs.6000/-per month in favour of opponent No.1 and amount of Rs.4000/-per month in favour of opponent No.2 to be paid by the present applicant-husband. Thus, total amount of maintenance to be paid per month comes to Rs.10,000/-. 2. Learned advocate Mr.Tolia appearing for the applicant ventilates grievance that the amount of maintenance, as awarded by the learned Family Court, is on higher side because the applicant is hardly earning Rs.1500/-by doing business of repairing of mobile phones whereas, on the other hand, opponent No.1-wife ascertained before the learned Family Court that the applicant is doing business of computer and mobile and thus, the applicant is earning about Rs.50,000/-per month. 3. On perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Family Court has rightly come to the conclusion that there is a reason for the opponent No.1-wife to stay separately from the applicant-husband and thus, the applicant-husband is liable to maintain wife and minor child. So far as quantum of amount of maintenance is concerned, it appears that the applicant-husband, though in possession of best evidence which would throw light on the issue in controversy, the applicant-husband withheld such evidence and whatever evidence placed on record is inconclusive and does not help either party in respect of drawing adverse inference in light of various pronouncements of the Hon’ble Apex Court. 4. Under the circumstances, it would be appropriate to call upon the parties to prove such things by production of relevant evidence. On perusal of the findings recorded by the learned Family Judge while answering issue Nos.3 and 4, it appears that the learned Family Judge assessed the daily income of the applicant at Rs.800/-and further, multiplied by 25 working days and thus, arrived at the amount of Rs.20,000/-per month. The entire exercise undertaken by the learned Family Judge is solely based upon presumption and in absence of any evidence adduced by the party so as to justify the daily income of the applicant at Rs.800/-. The entire exercise undertaken by the learned Family Judge is solely based upon presumption and in absence of any evidence adduced by the party so as to justify the daily income of the applicant at Rs.800/-. So, it would be appropriate to modify the impugned order by remanding the matter to the Family Court, Rajkot for reconsideration only on the issue of quantum of amount of maintenance because it is not possible even for this Court to fix the maintenance amount without any cogent evidence regarding income of the applicant, who is reluctant to disclose his correct income. Therefore, considering the attitude of the applicant-husband, while leading evidence on oath before the trial Court and in absence of proof of his income by cogent evidence, it is difficult to arrive at any specific conclusion regarding income of the applicant and to arrive at the amount, which can be awarded to the opponent Nos.1 and 2 as maintenance. 5. Under the circumstances, it would be proper to remand the matter to the learned Family Court so as to allow both the parties to adduce sufficient evidence so as to prove income of the applicant. 6. Needless to say that there are several means for both the parties to prove income of the applicant and, therefore, the matter is remanded to the learned Family Court for deciding the only issue of maintenance afresh and the learned Family Judge shall decide the same in accordance with law uninfluenced by the observations made in the impugned order. Pending hearing of the maintenance application afresh, the impugned order is hereby modified to the extent that the applicant-husband shall pay Rs.3000/-to opponent No.1 and Rs.2000/-to opponent No.2 by way of monthly maintenance and the same shall be treated as interim maintenance till fresh decision regarding quantum of maintenance amount is taken by the learned Family Court. It is clarified that any amount of maintenance paid till today and further, which will be paid to the opponent Nos.1 and 2 till final decision on the issue of quantum of maintenance shall be adjusted/accounted. It is also clarified that if any amount is deposited by the applicant during pendency of the maintenance petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, pending hearing of the present application, opponent No.1 – wife will be at liberty to withdraw such amount by A/c.Payee cheque on proper verification. 7. It is also clarified that if any amount is deposited by the applicant during pendency of the maintenance petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, pending hearing of the present application, opponent No.1 – wife will be at liberty to withdraw such amount by A/c.Payee cheque on proper verification. 7. Accordingly, the present application is hereby partly allowed and the impugned order is modified in the above manner. The trial Court directed to allow both the parties to lead evidence to prove the income of the applicant and shall decide the final maintenance amount in accordance with such evidence that may be led by the parties concerned. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.