Allahabad High Court
Smt. Manju Devi And Another vs Rajendra Kumar Yadav on 29 April, 2022
Bench: Brij Raj Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1214 of 2016
Revisionist :- Smt. Manju Devi And Another
Opposite Party :- Rajendra Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Revisionist :- Balram Yadava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Heard Sri Balram Yadava, counsel for the revisionists and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, counsel for the sole opposite party.
The present revision has been preferred with a prayer to modify the impugned judgment and order dated 08.09.2016 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sultanpur in Misc. Case No. 2091 of 2014 and enhance the maintenance amount at least to Rs.15,000/- and Rs.10,000/- per month awarded in respect of revisionists 1 and 2 respectively with a further prayer to grant the maintenance amounts with effect from the date of filing of the application for grant of maintenance allowance before the aforesaid family court i.e. 16.02.2012.
The main thrust of the argument of the counsel for the revisionists is that the revisionist are aggrieved by the impugned order in part, whereby Rs.9,000/- per month (cumulatively) has been awarded to the wife and the daughter whereas the income of the opposite party is Rs.50,000/- per month and the amount of maintenance is not according to the status and salary of the opposite party. It has further been argued that the order for maintenance has been passed prospectively i.e. from the date of order whereas it should have been awarded from the date of filing of the application for maintenance. Counsel for the revisionist has relied upon a judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Rajnesh Vs. Neha and Others [AIR 2021 SC 569].
Both the parties have no objection in case the revision is decided on the aforesaid two grounds. The revisionist is not assailing other parts of the judgment so far the factual part is concerned. Counsel for the revisionist has agreed that this legal issue/question may be decided which is established/available from the record.
The court below awarded Rs.5,000/- per month to the revisionist No. 1, Manju (wife) and Rs.4,000/- per month to revisionist No. 2 Anshu (daughter), as maintenance "from the date of order" i.e. 08.09.2016. It is relevant to mention here that the application for maintenance was filed by the revisionists on 16.02.2012 and the court below committed error by not awarding the maintenance "from the date of application".
Counsel for the revisionists has further invited the attention of the Court to the conclusion already arrived at in Issue No. 4 to the effect that the salary of the opposite party was Rs.50,000/- per month but the maintenance has only been awarded as Rs.9,000/- cumulatively to both the revisionists, which amount is lesser and does not commensurate with the salary as the opposite party was earning per month. Counsel for the revisionists has further submitted that at least one-fourth of the total salary should have been awarded. I am not proceeding in the case on factual aspects, I am deciding only two submissions.
I, therefore, modify the order dated 08.09.2016 to the extent that Rs.7,000/- per month to wife Manju Devi (revisionist No. 1) and Rs.5,000/- per month to daughter Anshu (revisionist No. 2), will be given as maintenance. Further, since the order of maintenance has been passed prospectively i.e. with effect from 08.09.2016, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh (supra), I modify the order further that the aforesaid amount of maintenance viz. Rs.7,000/- per month to wife Manju Devi (revisionist No. 1) and Rs.5,000/- per month to daughter Anshu (revisionist No. 2), will be given to them "from the date of application i.e. 16.02.2012".
The order dated 08.09.2016 is modified to the aforesaid extent and the revision disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
The payment, if any, already has been made by the opposite party, will be adjusted in the amount of arrears.
Order Date :- 29.4.2022
Arun K. Singh
