[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Shaikh Ahmed Shaikh Rasool vs Nasim Begum W/O. Shaikh Ahmed on 12 December, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:34804
{1} REVN 354 OF 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 354 OF 2023
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3488 OF 2022 IN REVN/354/2023
Shaikh Ahmed S/o. Shaikh Rasool
Aged : 68 years, Occu.: Nil,
Residing at village Shingi,
Tq.Gangapur, District Aurangabad. ....Applicant
Versus
Nasim Begum W/o. Shaikh Ahmed
Aged: 58 years, Occu.: Household,
C/o.Kadubegum Maqbool Patel,
Residing at Husain Colony, Garkheda Parisar,
Tq. and District : Aurangabad. .....Respondent
.....
Advocate for Applicant : Ms.Shubhangi D. More
Advocate for Respondent : Mr.Gajendra Devichand Jain
(Appointed Through Legal Aid)
.....
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
RESERVED ON : 11 DECEMBER, 2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 12 DECEMBER, 2025
JUDGMENT :
-
1. Revisionist (original respondent) in Criminal Misc. Application
No.20 of 2019, who is husband of present respondent (original
petitioner) is questioning judgment and order dated 01-01-2022,
passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad,
thereby enhancing maintenance claimed by respondent wife.
{2} REVN 354 OF 2023
2. Present respondent wife filed above Criminal Misc. Application
contending that previously by virtue of Criminal Misc. Application
No.31 of 2012 decided on 08-05-2012, she was granted maintenance
of Rs.1,500/- per month. That, said amount is meager. That, prices
of essential commodities are gone up and she, having no sufficient
source of income, is finding it difficult to maintain herself in said
quantum and therefore, she urged for enhancement by setting up a
case that husband owns 9 Acres 20 Gunthas irrigated agricultural
land wherein he reaps various crops and earns over Rs.6,00,000/- to
Rs.7,00,000/- per anuum. That, he also by rendering work of electric
rewinding earns Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- per month and also
distinctly earns from milk business. Thus, he is economically sound
and can easily pay atleast Rs.10,000/- per month by way of
maintenance and accordingly, she sought enhancement to such tune.
3. The above claim was resisted by present applicant husband
vide say exh.10, primarily raising objection about jurisdiction of the
Court to try and decide the application, as according to him,
respondent wife was residing at Shingi, Tq.Gangapur and thereby he
raised territorial jurisdiction of Family Court to decide the
application. As regards to entitlement of enhanced compensation is
{3} REVN 354 OF 2023
concerned, he denied above holdings on the count that said lands are
transferred to his third wife and son born out of it. He denied
distinct earnings from rewinding work or milk business as claimed by
wife.
4. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence adduced
by the parties, learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad,
was pleased to enhance compensation from Rs.1,500/- per month to
Rs.4,000/- per month. This is now taken exception to by filing
present revision.
5. Learned counsel for revisionist would submit that respondent
wife is not entitled for enhanced compensation, moreover, when she
was herself working in a primary school as a Cook and sufficiently
earning for herself. Further the observations and findings of learned
Principal Judge, Family Court are also questioned contending that
only on contentions of respondent wife, maintenance has been
enhanced. That, there was no distinct evidence regarding the income
of husband. Learned counsel further submitted that revisionist is
over 70 years of age and is currently having heart ailment and
requires to spend for the same and so lastly, it is submitted that the
impugned Judgment and order of granting exorbitant enhancement
{4} REVN 354 OF 2023
is without evidence and hence liable to be quashed and set aside.
6. Learned counsel for respondent wife would submit that there is
documentary evidence about agricultural landed properties owned by
revisionist husband. That, merely to deprive wife, properties are
deliberately transferred in the name of third wife and her son. That,
in fact, earnings are received by him from the said land and so called
job of respondent wife was said to be temporary and currently, she
has no other source but maintenance granted earlier. Learned
counsel submitted that, initially, only maintenance of Rs.1,500/- per
month was granted. That, by virtue of rise in prices, said quantum is
insufficient and so learned counsel justifies the Judgment and order
of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad, and prays
to dismiss the revision for want of merits.
7. Firstly, in the considered view of this Court, issue of
maintainability has rightly been dealt and decided by the learned
Principal Judge, Family Court, by relying on the decision of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha and another, in
Criminal Appeal No.730 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (Cri.) No.9503 of
2018) dated 04-11-2020. Therefore, proceeding for maintenance
{5} REVN 354 OF 2023
being in sequence to earlier proceeding, learned Principal Judge,
Family Court, does assume territorial jurisdiction to try and decide
the proceeding.
8. As regards to allegation of exorbitant quantum, it is seen that
before the Family Court, respondent wife has placed on record 7/12
extracts, 8-A extract of various Gat numbers bearing nos.15 and 25
demonstrating agricultural holdings. This aspect has not been
rendered doubtful. Oral evidence of respondent wife has virtually
remained undisturbed as revisionist husband did not contest or cross-
examined her. Consequently, there is no alternative before the court
than to accept the case set up by claimant wife and therefore, now it
does not lie in the mouth of revision petitioner that there was no
evidence except contentions and averments raised by respondent
wife. Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, has dealt and discussed
entitlement of respondent wife to seek enhanced compensation in
paragraph 12 and 13 of the impugned judgment. Lastly, it has been
observed in paragraph 14 that previous Judgment being 5 years back,
and due to rise in prices of commodities, it is rightly held that
respondent wife is entitled for enhancement. Therefore, there is no
infirmity in such findings.
{6} REVN 354 OF 2023
In view of above discussion, there being no merits in the
revision, it deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, following order is
passed :
ORDER
(i) Criminal Revision Application stands dismissed.
(ii) Pending Criminal Application is disposed of.
( ABHAY S. WAGHWASE )
JUDGE
SPT
