Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Lakshmi Paul vs The State Of West Bengal on 18 March, 2021
Form No. J(2)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta
C.R.R. 762 of 2021
Lakshmi Paul
-vs-
The State of West Bengal
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kallol Mondal
Mr. Krishan Ray
Ms. Amrita Chel
Mr. S. Das
Ms. A. Banerjee
For the Opposite parties : Mr. Ayan Bhattacharjee
Heard on : 18.03.2021
Judgment on : 18.03.2021
Jay Sengupta, J.:
Although this is an application seeking an expeditious
disposal of several execution cases filed under Section 125(3) of the
Code, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the wife/petitioner
submits that the petitioner would not like to press for the same in
respect of the other Misc. Execution Cases, except Misc. Execution
Case no.31 of 2018. She would file separate revisional applications in
respect of the other execution cases.
On such prayer, the application is disposed of as not
pressed in respect of the other execution cases. However, the
petitioner shall be at liberty to file separate revisional applications
seeking expeditious disposal of the said execution cases.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits as follows.
The original final order of maintenance allowance was passed by the
learned Trial Court in 2008. A revisional application was preferred by
the petitioner challenging the insufficiency of the maintenance
allowance granted. By an order dated 24.06.2010 passed in CRR 1780
of 2008, this Court directed the husband/opposite party to pay to the
petitioner maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.6000/- for the wife
and Rs.3000/- for the minor daughter. It was challenged by the husband
by was of Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court. By an
order dated 20.09.2012 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl)
No.7450 of 2010, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to dismiss
the said application. Thereafter, the husband prayed for modification of
the order and filed an application under Section 127 of the Code for
alteration of the amount granted. The said application is still pending.
The wife filed another application for enhancement of maintenance
under Section 127 of the Code in 2012. In 2018, the same was
disposed of by the learned Trial Court enhancing the amounts to
Rs.6000/- for the wife and Rs.5000/- for the minor daughter. The
husband challenged the said order before the learned Sessions Judge.
The said proceeding was stayed by this Court at the behest of the
wife/petitioner. In the meantime, a lot of arrears had accrued in respect
of the maintenance allowance payable to the wife and the child. The
petitioner was constrained to file several execution cases in this regard.
The present execution case has remained pending since 2018.
I have heard the submissions of the learned Counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and have perused the revision
petition.
No prejudice will be caused to anyone, if a direction is
passed to expedite the proceeding.
It appears that some delay was occasioned in disposing of
the execution case being Misc. Execution Case No.31 of 2018.
In view of the above and in the interest of justice, I request
the learned executing Court to dispose of the application as
expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary
adjournment to any of the parties, preferably within a period of four
months from the next date of hearing.
On the prayer of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner, the department is directed to return back the certified
copies of orders in respect of the Execution Case No.12 of 2019, 09 of
2019 and 12 of 2020 to the learned Advocate on record of the petitioner
upon usual undertakings and upon furnishing photostat copies of the
same for the record.
With these observations, the revisional application is
disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied
to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.
(Jay Sengupta, J.)
