The single judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that even a person who is unemployed and is well-built is under a legal obligation to maintain his wife and children. The court furthermore held that the Petitioner is working as a technical hand in Delhi and the quantum of maintenance of Rs 11,000/- is a meagre amount considering it is fixed for three persons.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the learned principal family judge passed an order of maintenance directing the petitioner to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife i.e. Opposite Party No. 2 and Rs. 3,000 per month to Elder Son Shivam Kumar and Rs. 3,000 per month to Younger Son. Therefore, the present criminal revision petition is filed.
Contentions of the Petitioner
The Petitioner submitted that the order passed by the family court is an exparte order. It was furthermore submitted that the dispute was settled between the parties in mediation, however, the Opposite Party No.2 refused to abide by the terms of the settlement. Also, Petitioner is a private mechanic; he is an air conditioner mechanic working in Delhi.
Contentions of the State
The Respondent submitted that the notice was issued to the Petitioner and when the Petitioner didn’t appear, the matter was decided exparte. It was furthermore submitted that the settlement which was entered into in the mediation center was ultimately not accepted by the Opposite Party No. 2 and apparently no joint compromise petition was filed for the disposal of the case before the learned Court.
Observations of the Court
The Hon’ble Court observed that the notice was served upon the Petitioner and despite that he refused to take part in the proceedings, therefore, the matter was set exparte.
It was furthermore observed that even a person who is unemployed and is well-built is under a legal obligation to maintain his wife and children. The court relied upon the judgment titled Rajnesh v. Neha.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the view that the quantum of maintenance is concerned, an amount of Rs.11,000/- only has been fixed for three persons; the opposite party No.2 and her two children, and the amount of maintenance is a meagre amount.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court dismissed the criminal revision petition.
Case title: Dilip Modi V. The State of Jharkhand
Case No.: Cr. Revision No. 574 of 2019
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Lalan Kumar Singh, Advocate
Advocate for the State: Mr. V. S. Sahay, APP
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
