JUDGMENT 1. The instant revision has been preferred by the petitioner Dharmendra Dhaniya for assailing the order dated 09.09.2020 passed by the Judge, Family Court No.2, Jodhpur in Criminal Original Case No.13/2019 whereby, the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. preferred by the respondents being the wife and daughter of the petitioner, was partly accepted and the petitioner herein was directed to make payment of a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards monthly maintenance to his minor daughter respondent No.2. 2. I have heard and considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel Shri Arora representing the petitioner and have gone through the impugned order. 3. Suffice it to say that the petitioner is a Teacher in the Education Department and as per his salary statement, he was drawing net salary of Rs.69,111/- per month. The sole argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner for assailing the impugned order is that the respondent wife Smt. Reena is also posted as a Teacher in the Education Department and that she too earns handsome salary and thus, it is her obligation to maintain the child. I have considered the said submission advanced by Shri Arora and have carefully perused the impugned order. 4. Suffice it to say that there cannot be any dispute regarding obligation of both the parents to maintain the minor children. The Family Court consciously deliberated upon the entire material available on record and held that Smt. Reena was bringing up the child with all possible love and affection and all efforts were being put in by her to ensure the best interest of the child. The petitioner who earns a hefty salary by working as a Teacher in the Education Department, cannot shrug off the responsibility to bear the expenses for the upbringing of the child. A sum of Rs.15,000/- per month awarded to the child as maintenance cannot be said to be excessive or unreasonable by any stretch of imagination in these times of high cost of living. 5. Thus, I am of the firm opinion that the learned Family Court was absolutely justified in directing the petitioner to make payment of a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month towards monthly maintenance of his daughter while deciding the application by the impugned order dated 09.09.2020 which ex-facie does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity whatsoever warranting interference therein. 6. Thus, I am of the firm opinion that the learned Family Court was absolutely justified in directing the petitioner to make payment of a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month towards monthly maintenance of his daughter while deciding the application by the impugned order dated 09.09.2020 which ex-facie does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity whatsoever warranting interference therein. 6. Hence, the revision petition as well as stay application are rejected as being devoid of merit.