Orissa High Court
Tikan Kumar Naik vs Sibani Debi .... Opp. Party on 21 June, 2024
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 24-Jun-2024 12:24:51
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
RPFAM No. 426 OF 2023
Tikan Kumar Naik .... Petitioner
Mr. Amit Prasad Bose, Advocate
-versus-
Sibani Debi .... Opp. Party
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 21.06.2024
4. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Perused the report of learned Deputy Registrar (Judicial)
at Flag-X.
3. Notice by registered post with AD issued on the sole
Opposite Party was refused to receive by her. Hence, notice on
the Opposite Party is treated to be sufficient.
4. This RPFAM has been filed assailing the judgment dated
20th November, 2023 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Judge,
Family Court, Khurda in Criminal Petition No.33 of 2022,
whereby the Petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of
Rs.10,000/- per month to the Opposite Party from the date of
application, i.e., from 27th January, 2022.
5. Mr. Bose, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that
marital relationship between the parties is not disputed. Net
income of the Petitioner was Rs.39,857/- for the month of July,
2023. He was working as a Headmaster in a Government
School. Likewise, the Opposite Party is working as a G.N.M.
and is getting Rs.29,000/- per month. Learned Judge, Family
// 2 //
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 24-Jun-2024 12:24:51
Court while adjudicating the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
did not take into account personal expenses of the Petitioner as
well as income of the Opposite Party. It disbelieved the plea of
the Petitioner observing that no document in support of the
income of the Opposite Party was filed by the Petitioner. He,
however, submits that the contention raised by the Petitioner
with regard to employment and income of the Opposite Party
was never denied by her before the Family Court. Further she
has not filed affidavit of her assets and liabilities before the
Family Court. Thus, the income of the Opposite Party as stated
by the Petitioner should have been accepted by learned Judge,
Family Court. As such, the impugned judgment directing the
Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month as maintenance
is not sustainable and is liable to be set aside.
6. He further submits that this Court finding a prima facie
case while issuing notice to the Opposite Party vide order dated
10th January, 2024 directed the Petitioner to pay a sum of
Rs.7,500/- per month as maintenance to the Opposite Party,
which is being paid to her regularly. It is for the aforesaid reason
probably the Opposite Party did not prefer to appear and contest
the RPFAM. He, therefore, prays for disposal of the RPFAM
accordingly.
7. Taking note of the submission made by learned counsel
for the Petitioner, this Court finds that the Petitioner has
categorically stated that the Opposite Party was drawing a salary
of Rs.20,000/- per month. No material to the contrary appears to
have been filed by the Opposite Party. It further appears that the
net income of the Petitioner as would appears from Ext.A was
// 3 //
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 24-Jun-2024 12:24:51
Rs.39,857/- per month in the month of July, 2023. Thus, taking
note of the fact that the Opposite Party is employed and is
getting a substantial amount towards her salary, this Court feels
that the direction to pay maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month
to her is unreasonable. This aspect was not taken into
consideration by learned Judge, Family Court, while
adjudicating the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C..
8. In that view of the matter, this Court while modifying the
impugned order under Annexure-1, directs the Petitioner to pay
a sum of Rs.7,500/- (Rupees seven thousand five hundred only)
per month to the Opposite Party from the date of filing of
application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., i.e., from 27th January,
2022.
9. The Petitioner is at liberty to move learned Judge, Family
Court, Khurda for fixation of suitable installments to pay arrear
amount accordingly, if any cause of action arises.
10. Accordingly, the RPFAM is disposed of with the
modification as aforesaid in the impugned judgment under
Annexure-1.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
ms Judge
