JUDGMENT & ORDER : Heard Mr. A. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Ms. B. Chakraborty, learned legal aid counsel appearing for the sole respondent. 2. By means of this revision petition filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, the petitioner has challenged the legality of the judgment dated 15.07.2015 delivered in Criminal Misc. No.(125)51 of 2014 by the Judge, Family Court, Kailashahar, Unakoti, Tripura. 3. The respondent had filed a petition for maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. as the petitioner after contracting the second marriage refused to maintain her. The respondent had asserted in the said petition that she was subjected to torture by the petitioner and other inmates. That apart, the petitioner herein was leading a licentious life having no respect for the marital sanctity. Even when the respondent sought intervention of the family elders including her mother-in-law, she did not get any support from them. Series of allegations have been made against the inmates including her father-in-law. Even the father-in-law once tried to rape her. Thus the petitioner lost all her hope of living peacefully in the matrimonial home and was compelled to live in her paternal home. The respondent has asserted that the petitioner has income of Rs.20,000/- per month from his business. 4. After recording the evidence the Judge, Family Court observed that the respondent is also gainfully engaged as the Asha Supervisor and she was drawing honorarium of Rs.1,500/- and extra remuneration for her field visit. On consideration of all those aspects, the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month as the maintenance allowance with effect from 08.09.2014. The petitioner has contended in the Family Court that he does not have any regular income. Despite that, the Family Court has observed that his income shall not be less than 10,000/- per month from his business of electric goods. 5. Mr. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has stated that the inference as drawn on income does not have any foundation and it is whimsical in nature. The petitioner is a day labourer. Hardly his income is more than 3,000/per month. Accordingly, Mr. Pal, learned counsel has urged this court to rationalize this maintenance allowance keeping in view that the respondent is at least earning a sum of Rs.5,400/- per month from her engagement as the Asha Supervisor. 6. Ms. The petitioner is a day labourer. Hardly his income is more than 3,000/per month. Accordingly, Mr. Pal, learned counsel has urged this court to rationalize this maintenance allowance keeping in view that the respondent is at least earning a sum of Rs.5,400/- per month from her engagement as the Asha Supervisor. 6. Ms. B. Chakraborty, learned legal aid counsel appearing for the respondent while refuting such submission as advanced by Mr. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is getting only Rs. 1,500/- per month and she may get a sum of Rs.150/- per field visit. The respondent is seldom assigned with the field visit, thus she does not have income more than Rs. 1,500/- on regular basis. 7. Having appreciated the records as well as the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that the petitioner shall pay Rs.2,000/- per month to the respondent within 7th day of every English calendar month positively. The said sum shall be remitted to the respondent by money order for which the petitioner shall bear the charges. However, if the respondent furnished her bank account details, the petitioner may remit the said amount by transfer to her account. This modified quantum of maintenance shall come in effect from 01.02.2017 and be payable on or before 07.03.2017. Further, the petitioner shall continue to pay the said sum. The petitioner shall clear the arrear maintenance for the period from 08.09.2014 till 31.01.2017, if not paid. The petitioner is further given liberty to pay the arrear by 5 equal monthly installments with the maintenance allowance. Accordingly, this petition stands partly allowed to the extent as indicated above. Send down the LCRs forthwith.