JUDGMENT : V.K. Jadhav, J. By way of this writ petition the petitioner is challenging the order passed by the Judge, Family Court Aurangabad dated 21.8.2007 in petition No. E-396 of 2005 thereby granting maintenance to respondent wife at the rate of Rs.1000/- p.m. and Rs.750/- p.m. each to two children from the date of filing of petition. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows :- (a) The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 30.4.1999 and the respondent wife was treated well for some period and thereafter she was subjected to cruelty by the petitioner husband. She has no brother and the petitioner husband has ill eye on the property of her parents. Even respondent wife has lodged complaint in Mahila Takrar Nivaran Kendra on 8.1.2001. In terms of compromise, the petitioner husband took her with him at the matrimonial house. However, after some period, she was again subjected to ill treatment. Even the petitioner husband has demanded certain amount for purchase of Rickshaw from her parents. In the year 2005, respondent wife was driven out from her matrimonial house. Even she had lodged complaint about each and every incidents with the police. The petitioner husband though having sufficient means, refused and neglected to maintain her and children. Thus, she constrained to file application for grant of maintenance for herself and children, as they are unable to maintain themselves. (b) The petitioner husband has also initiated proceedings against respondent wife for restitution of conjugal rights. According to the petitioner husband, respondent wife insisted him to reside separate from his parents and even they started residing separately, respondent wife used to visit frequently the house of her parents without his permission and used to stay with her parents. It has also contended that respondent wife resides separately without any just cause and therefore, she is not entitled for any maintenance. (c) Both the parties led their oral as well as documentary evidence in support of their rival contentions. Learned Judge of the Family Court has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner husband for restitution of conjugal rights, however, allowed the application filed by respondent wife and accordingly directed the petitioner husband to pay her maintenance at the rate of Rs.1000/- p.m. and Rs.750/- p.m. each to the children, from the date of filing of petition. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner husband is not in a position to pay maintenance amount due to closure of industry where he was serving and thus, he is drawing half of the wages. Considering the same, this court by order dated 15.4.2009 directed the petitioner husband to deposit the amount of past maintenance of Rs.1500/- p.m. from the date of application and further directed him to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.1500/- p.m. regularly from the May, 2009 onwards. The respondent wife has no just cause to reside separately and claim the maintenance. Respondent wife without any reason is staying with her parents and thus she is not entitled to claim maintenance. 4. Learned counsel for respondent wife submits that as the respondent wife was subjected to ill treatment on account of non fulfilment of unlawful demands and she had lodged complaints either in the police station or before the Mahila Takrar Nivaran Kendra against the respondent husband. She has just cause to live separate and to claim maintenance. Respondent wife and her children have no independent source of income and they are unable to maintain themselves. The petitioner husband is serving with an industry on monthly salary and even after interim order passed by this court, as aforesaid, the petitioner husband has not deposited any amount towards arrears of maintenance and even towards maintenance in future, as directed by this court. 5. On careful perusal of judgment and order passed by the Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad, it appears that there is satisfactory evidence adduced by respondent wife about refusal and neglect on the part of petitioner husband to maintain her. There is sufficient evidence on record to show that respondent wife subjected to ill treatment on the account of non fulfilment of unlawful demands. It further appears that though having sufficient means, petitioner husband refused and neglected to maintain the wife and children. I do not find any reason for the wife, having two children, to stay in the house of her parents without any just reason. So far as the interim order passed by this Court in the year 2009 and even thereafter, the petitioner husband has not bothered to comply with the said order. I do not find any reason for the wife, having two children, to stay in the house of her parents without any just reason. So far as the interim order passed by this Court in the year 2009 and even thereafter, the petitioner husband has not bothered to comply with the said order. It is difficult to believe that since then the petitioner husband is getting only half salary from the said industry and he is not earning anything for his livelihood. It has also observed by the Judge of Family Court that the petitioner husband is also dealing in cloth business and earning some amount from that business. 6. It is a matter of record that respondent wife and her children have no source of income and they are just unable to maintain themselves. I do not find any fault in the judgment and order passed by the Judge Family Court, Aurangabad while granting maintenance amount to the respondent wife and children from the petitioner husband. Considering the financial condition of the petitioner husband and standard of living of the parties and considering the prices of essential commodities and need of the petitioner, learned Judge of the Family court has granted just and reasonable amount of compensation. There is no reason to interfere in the impugned judgment and order. Writ petitioner is hereby dismissed. Rue stands discharged. Petition dismissed.