ORDER : 1. This revision application has been filed by the husband under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act challenging the order dated 27.5.2015 in Misc. Case No. 12 of 2014 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Brief facts giving rise to this revision application are follows: 3. The applicant Bela Kusum Banra has filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stating therein that she was married to Nand Kishore Banra (petitioner of this application) in the year 1992. She further stated that out of the said marriage, two sons namely, Achal Marsi Banra and Anmol Banra were born. Since last five years her husband is refusing and neglecting to maintain her without any reason and bona fide cause as such, all the expenses are being borne by the applicant including educational expenses of the children. 4. She has further stated that she has undergone a major operation as she was suffering from breast cancer and she is still under medical treatment. She claims that her husband is a Government servant, posted as Assistant MESO Officer, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa and is earning handsome salary of Rs.44,000/- per month. As she is maintained by her husband, she has filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure claiming maintenance of her and her sons. 5. The husband-opposite party has appeared and filed a reply. He admitted relationship between the parties and has also admitted that he is father of Achal Marsi Banra and Anmol Banra. He further stated that the applicant herself is a Government employee and his drawing salary of more than 50,000/- per month thus, she is very well able to maintain herself and the children. He states that he has arranged friendly loan of Rs.2,50,000/- for treatment and operation of his wife and he is still repaying instalment of the same. He mentions that due to heavy burden of loan upon him, he is not in a position to give more money to his family. 6. The applicant produced documentary evidence reference of which has been made in paragraph 6 of the judgment which reproduced herein-below:- (i) Xerox copy of receipt no.65001904, 27th June, 2014 of Rs.31,500.00 of Achal Banra issued from Aarupadai Vedu Institute of Technology. 6. The applicant produced documentary evidence reference of which has been made in paragraph 6 of the judgment which reproduced herein-below:- (i) Xerox copy of receipt no.65001904, 27th June, 2014 of Rs.31,500.00 of Achal Banra issued from Aarupadai Vedu Institute of Technology. (ii) Xerox copy of receipt no.65001904, 27th June 2014 of Rs.31,500.00 of Achal Mercy Banra issued from Amudh Catering Services Private Limited. (iii) Students performance report Avit/SPR/37 Dept BE/ECE dated 22.4.2013 of Vinayaka Missions University, Aarupadai Veedu Institute of Technology , Paiyanoor to Nand Kishore Banra of Achal Mercy Banra. (iv) Students performance Feedback dated 10.12.12. of Achal Mercy Banra issued from Aarupadai Veedu Institute of Technology Paiyanoor. (v) Students performance report, dated 21.8.13 issued from Vinayaka Missions University to Mr. Nand Kishore Banra of Achal Mercy Banra. (vi) Xerox copy of Students performance report dated 10.9.13. (vii) Xerox copy of Birth Certificate No.41548 Jharkhand Govt. of Achal Mercy Banra. (viii) Xerox copy of Secondary Examination Registration slip. Jharkhand Academic Council Ranchi, Regn. Receipt No.5425523 o Anmol Banra. 7. The applicant has also examined three witnesses, though the husband has failed to examine any witness. He also failed to produce any document. 8. After hearing the parties learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Chaibasa vide judgment dated 27.5.2015 directed to provide maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.10,000/- per month to the minor son Anmol Banra till attaining the age of majority from the date of application i.e.05.06.2014 regularly. 9. Aggrieved by the said order, the husband has filed the instant revision application. 10. I have heard the argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner and also counsel for the opposite parties 2 and 3, who happen to be the son and wife of the petitioner. 11. The wife has claimed maintenance for herself and on behalf of her two sons. She has deposed that her husband is a Government employee and is earning Rs.44,000/- and opposite party is not maintaining her. She deposed that she is spending huge amount on the education of her son and constructed a house without any help from her husband. She further deposed that the attitude of her husband drastically changed and he started living separately and neglected the claimant and did not provide maintenance to her children. She claimed that she has undergone major surgical operation for her breast cancer. 12. She further deposed that the attitude of her husband drastically changed and he started living separately and neglected the claimant and did not provide maintenance to her children. She claimed that she has undergone major surgical operation for her breast cancer. 12. In her cross-examination, she has admitted that one of her son, i.e. applicant no.3 is major and her younger son is a minor and student of matriculation. The sons were examined as P.W.3 and P.W.1, who supported the case of their mother. 13. From the impugned judgment it transpires that the wife has admitted that she is also a Government employee and is drawing salary of Rs.50,000/- per month. This fact, at the time of argument, was not denied by the Lawyer for the claimant. The wife claimed that she is suffering from Breast Cancer and spent huge money for the treatment and she has operated upon which also is a costly affair. The wife has produced several documents which were exhibited. These documents relate to educational papers and receipts and report card of Achal Mercy Banra and Anmol Benra. From the list of these documents, it is clear that no documents have been produced by the wife in support of her treatment and the medical expenses incurred by her. The court below has held that wife is under financial crises due to her treatment of Breast Cancer and the opposite party having sufficient means from his salary of Rs.44,000/- per month is liable to provide maintenance to the claimant. 14. It is admitted case that wife is Government employee and is earning Rs.50,000/- per month. This fact clearly suggests that she is in a position to maintain herself. One of the conditions for grant of maintenance is to see whether the wife is unable to maintain herself. In this case the simple fact that the wife is earning Rs.50,000/- per month which, in fact, is more than the husband, clearly suggests that it is not a case the wife is not unable to maintain herself. Further the fact that the wife is financially sound will be evident from her cross-examination wherein she has already stated that she has purchased a land in Chaibasa and have constructed a house without any co-operation from her husband. As noticed earlier, no documents have been presented before the court in support of the medical expenses incurred by the wife. 15. As noticed earlier, no documents have been presented before the court in support of the medical expenses incurred by the wife. 15. In view of the fact that the wife is in a position to maintain herself by getting salary of Rs.50,000/-, she is not entitled to get any amount as maintenance from the husband, thus, the order to grant maintenance @ Rs.10,000/- per month to the wife is set aside. 16. However, the minor son is concerned, it is clear that he is a student and studying in a school. It is the duty of the parents to maintain their child. Admittedly, the minor child is not being maintained by the petitioner-husband rather the mother only is taking care of him. 17. In that view of the matter, an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month as maintenance of the minor child Anmol Banra passed by the court below is justified and proper which needs no interference. 18. It is pertinent to point out that the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chaibasa has not granted any maintenance to applicant no.3, who is a major. 19. Thus, in view of what has been held above, this revision application is allowed in part and the maintenance granted to the wife is set aside and the amount of maintenance granted to minor son Anmol Banra is upheld. 20. Ordered accordingly.