Lili Sarkar(Barman) vs Alok Chandra Barman
2022 Latest Caselaw 2526 Cal

05.05. 2022 item No.06 n.b.

ct. no. 34 CRR 2442 of 2016

Lili Sarkar(Barman) Vs.

Alok Chandra Barman

Mr. Raja Biswas, Mr. Abhijit Sarkar .....for the Petitioner Mr. Imran Ali, Ms. Debjani Sahu, .....for the State

Mr. Debabrata Roy, Mr. Soumik Mondal ... for the opposite party.

Learned advocate for the petitioner has challenged the

order passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Dakshin Dinajpur at

Balurghat in Criminal Revision No.12 of 2016.

The background of the case is that an application under

Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was preferred at the

instance of the present petitioner and the Learned Judicial

Magistrate 2nd Court, Balurghat, Dakshin Dinajpur in connection

with M.R. Case No.68 of 2013, T.R. Case no.27 of 2013 was pleased

to award maintenance to the tune of Rs.7,000/- per month to the

wife and Rs.5,000/- per month to the minor child. The said order

was challenged by the husband before the Learned Sessions Court

invoking its revisional jurisdiction. The learned Sessions Court on

an appreciation of the materials arrived at a finding thereby

modifying the award to Rs.4,000/- per month to the wife and

Rs.3,000/- per month to the minor child to be paid from the date of

the order i.e. 12.4.2016.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner contends

that the husband of the petitioner is working in Border Security

Force and as such the award of maintenance is not commensurate

with the amount which has been awarded by the Learned Sessions

Judge.

Per contra Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the

husband/opposite party supports the order passed by the learned

Sessions Judge and submits that the husband is having further

tenure of nine months in his service, he has other expenses and

liabilities for the family members and the learned Sessions Court

has come to finding on the basis of the foundation of the salary he

has received.

I have considered the judgment delivered both by the

Learned Magistrate and the learned Sessions Judge, wherein the

original salary certificate or salary receipts have not been admitted

in evidence. As such, the Court relied upon the oral evidence and

inadmissible documents and arrived at its finding. Taking into

account the present cost index and the fact that there is a school

going child, I am of the opinion that the quantum so modified by

the learned Sessions Judge calls for interference.

Accordingly, the said quantum is altered and modified to

the extent that the minor child would receive a sum of Rs.7,000/-

per month while the present petitioner being the wife would receive

a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month. As the date so fixed by the

Learned Sessions Court is from 12.4.2016, I direct that all the

arrears which accrued pursuant to the present order being passed

should be liquidated by April 30, 2023. The regular maintenance in

the meantime should be paid as directed above aggregating to a

sum of Rs.12,000/- per month.

With the aforesaid observations, CRR 2442 of 2016 is

disposed of.

All pending connected applications, if any, are

consequently disposed of.

Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

( Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)