Shyamdeo Ram vs Sunita Devi
2022 Latest Caselaw 479 Jhar

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    Criminal Revision No.145 of 2020
                                  ----

Shyamdeo Ram                                  ....    ....     Petitioner
                                Versus
Sunita Devi                                   ....    ....     Opposite Party
                                  ----
         CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
                                  ----
For the Petitioner                     : Mrs. Gouri Debi, Adv.
For the O.P.                           :
                                  ----

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner had no objections with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

----

th 02/Dated: 15 February, 2022

1. The instant criminal revision application has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 23.12.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro in Maintenance Alteration Case No.03 of 2018 whereby and whereunder the application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the Opposite Party, has been allowed and the maintenance amount has been enhanced from Rs.4,000/- per month to Rs.6,000/- per month.

2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that earlier the wife has been granted maintenance of Rs.2,000/- per month in the year 2013 which has been enhanced to Rs.4,000/- per month in the year 2016. The wife has filed petition for the enhancement claiming that she is suffering from serious ailment and she has produced document to that effect and the court below after considering the same has enhanced the maintenance amount.

3. Counsel for the husband has assailed the order stating that the revisionist has retired from his services on January, 2020 and after retirement his source of income has reduced and as such he prays for reduction of the maintenance amount.

4. Having heard the counsel for the revisionist and from perusal of the records, it appears that retirement is after passing of the order and this is subsequent event. Further, the court below has enhanced the amount after considering the medical case of the wife.

5. Considering the reasoning given by the court below, this Court does not find any reasonable reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. Accordingly, the present criminal revision application being Criminal Revision No.145 of 2020 stands dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Amar/-