Smt. Chanda vs Basantraj Lot
2024 Latest Caselaw 15025 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt. Chanda vs Basantraj Lot on 20 May, 2024

Author: Prem Narayan Singh

Bench: Prem Narayan Singh

                                                            1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
                                                 ON THE 20 th OF MAY, 2024
                                           CRIMINAL REVISION No. 486 of 2015

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    SMT. CHANDA W/O BASANTRAJ LOT, AGED
                                ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOTHING 90/7,
                                NAMDARPURA, BHERUNALA, UJJAIN (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          2.    MOHIT S/O BASANTRAJ LOT, AGED ABOUT 20
                                Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: STUDENT   90/7,
                                NAMDARPURA, BHERULAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    PAYAL D/O BASANTRAJ LOT, AGED ABOUT 18
                                Y E A R S , OCCUPATION:  STUDENT   90/7,
                                NAMDARPURA, BHERULAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....PETITIONER
                          (SHRI VIRENDRA SINGH CHOUHAN DAD R.N.6, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR
                          THE PETITIONER .

                          AND
                          BASANTRAJ LOT S/O LATE SHRI RADHKISHANJI LOT,
                          AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE,
                          NAGAR PALIK NIGAM, INDORE RAJ MOHALLA,
                          HARIJAN COLONY, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                          (SHRI SATISH TOMAR, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT [R-
                          1].

                                This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

1. This criminal revision has been filed by the petitioners under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act of Cr.P.C r/w Section 397 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 16.01.2015, passed by learned Principal Judge,

Family Court, Ujjain M.P., in MJCR No.148/2013, whereby the learned Principal Judge has allowed the application filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. and enhanced the amount from Rs.1500 to Rs.3000/- per month as maintenance, Hence, the present petition for enhancement of the maintenance.

2 . During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the income of the respondent is approximately Rs.17,000/- per month as he is working in Indore Municipal Corporation, but the learned trial Court has awarded only Rs.3000/- per month in favour of the petitioner. Looking to the present scenario of hike in prices and standard of husband, the

amount of maintenance should be enhanced.

3. Counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer, but he has also submitted that the trial Court has passed the order after considering each and every aspect of the case and the order is correct in the eyes of law and facts. However, during the course of arguments, he agreed that the amount of Rs.1000/- may be enhanced for petitioner.

4. As agreed, maintenance of Rs.4000/- per month in place of Rs.3000/- per month in favour of petitioner/wife would be appropriate from the date of impugned order dated 16.01.2016.

5. In view of aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of by setting aside the impugned order with a direction that the petitioner shall pay Rs.4000/- per month in place of Rs.3000/- per month in favour of petitioner/wife from the date of impugned order dated 16.01.2016.

6. The respondent is also directed to deposit the arrears of maintenance amount within two months from the date of this order and shall also pay the

regular monthly amount of maintenance.

7. A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Court concerned for information.

8. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of. Certified copy, as per rules.

(PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE amit