Arati Pradhan vs Jamesh Chandra Pradhan
2023 Latest Caselaw 6166 Ori

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 16-May-2023 19:29:09

                                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                                               RPFAM No. 86 OF 2018
                                               Arati Pradhan                           ....      Petitioner
                                                                              Mr. Anirudha Das, Advocate
                                                                     -versus-
                                               Jamesh Chandra Pradhan                   ....    Opp. Party


                                                    CORAM:
                                                    JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
                                                                    ORDER

                     Order No.                                     16.05.2023
                           3.             1.      This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Judgment dated 31st January, 2018 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Phulbani in C.R.P. No.98 of 2016 is under challenge in this RPFAM, whereby refusing maintenance to the Petitioner, the Opposite Party has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month to his minor daughter from the date of filing of the application, i.e., from 22nd September, 2016.

3. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that although Misc. Case No.60 of 2004 filed by the Petitioner for maintenance was disposed of on compromise between the parties on payment of Rs.1,00,000/- as One Time Settlement, but the same is not sufficient for maintenance of the Petitioner, for which the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed. It is also admitted that the minor daughter was pursuing her studies. He, therefore, submits that the Petitioner is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. though she has received Rs.1,00,000/- towards One Time Settlement.

Signature Not Verified // 2 // Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 16-May-2023 19:29:09

4. On perusal of the order sheet, it appears that notice on the Opposite Party could not be issued due to non-filing of requisites by the Petitioner.

5. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the Petitioner and on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the Petitioner has received a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards One Time Settlement in a petition for maintenance in Misc. Case No.60 of 2004. In terms of such settlement, G.R. Case No.353 of 2005 was also compounded. No material has been placed before learned Judge, Family Court that the Petitioner has further need after receiving a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.

6. In absence of any material to the effect that receipt of money towards One Time Settlement is not sufficient for her sustenance, this Court is of the considered opinion that learned Judge, Family Court has committed no error in refusing the maintenance in favour of the Petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the RPFAM being devoid of any merit stands dismissed.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

                                                                            (K.R. Mohapatra)
             ms                                                                   Judge