Gujarat High Court
Sandipkumar Bhupendrabhai Barot vs Komalben Chandrakantbhai Barot W/O ... on 27 June, 2024
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/441/2022 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR MAINTENANCE) NO. 441 of
2022
With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 441 of 2022
==========================================================
SANDIPKUMAR BHUPENDRABHAI BAROT
Versus
KOMALBEN CHANDRAKANTBHAI BAROT W/O BAROT SANDIPKUMAR
BHUPENDRABHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
JIGESH K SHAH(7377) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JF MEHTA(461) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JM BAROT(143) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 27/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. It appears from the record that the observation of
the Family Court, Mehsana dated 6.9.2021 shows
that the opponent has not cross-examined the
applicant, though number of times, adjournment was
granted and thereby his right to cross-examine
came to be closed.
2. Learned advocate Mr. Mehta for the applicant
submitted that the matter was referred to the
Mediation Center but the mediation has failed. Mr.
Mehta stated that applicant no.1 is earning more
than that of the present applicant while Mr. Barot
submitted that though the parties had an
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/441/2022 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2024
undefined
opportunity to settle the dispute, mediation has
failed. Advocate Mr. Barot submitted that the
applicant himself was lethargic in the
proceedings. He was accorded sufficient
opportunity to place the evidence on record.
Inspite of that, he has failed to do so. Advocate
Mr. Barot submitted that now the applicant cannot
be permitted to fill in the lacuna.
3. Having perused the record, the mediation report
shows that mediation has been unsuccessful. The
present applicant had not defended the proceedings
while as per the observation, the affidavit of the
respondent in accordance to the judgment in the
case of Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324 was
filed.
4. In view of the fact of the earnings and the
dispute raised and the applicant in Criminal Misc.
Application no. 167 of 2019 herself has noted in
the cause title that the husband is conducting
tuition classes, let the fact of the earning of
both the parties be proved on record on final
decision of the matter. In the result Criminal
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/441/2022 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2024
undefined
Misc. Application no. 167 of 2019 is ordered to be
restored. The order is restored with a direction
that the liberty be granted to both the parties to
provide the evidence on record and in the
meantime, this Court does not want to upset the
maintenance amount which has been ordered by the
learned Principal Judge, Family Court.
5. In the meantime, the present applicant as husband
and father is directed to deposit the maintenance
amount as ordered on 6.9.2021. It is stated that
the matter would be placed before Kalol Family
Court. Let this matter be remanded back to the
concerned Trial Court. Let the concerned Trial
Court decide the matter as expeditiously as
possible preferably within a period of four months
from the date of receipt of this order.
6. Accordingly, the present application stands
disposed of. Consequently, Criminal Misc.
Application also stands disposed of. Direct
service is permitted.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Maulik
