Patna High Court
Abhishekh Roy vs Anjali Kumari @ Anjali Roy on 1 July, 2024
Author: Arun Kumar Jha
Bench: Arun Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.464 of 2021
======================================================
Abhishekh Roy S/o Ram Jee Roy resident of 4, BT Road Sinthee More,
Police Station- Baza Nagar, Kolkata, West Bengal.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Anjali Kumari @ Anjali Roy W/o Akhilesh Roy and D/o Alakh Narayan
Singh resident of Mohalla- Pakari Chowk Ara, Police Station- Ara Nawada.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rahul Nath, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 01-07-2024
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
learned counsel for the respondent and I intend to dispose of the
instant petition at the stage of admission itself.
2. The instant petition has been filed under Article 227
of the Constitution of India against the order dated 16.12.2019
passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur at Ara in
Maintenance Case No. 216 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the
learned family court has directed the petitioner to pay an amount
of Rs.6000/- per month to the respondent as interim maintenance
from the date of application.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a taxi driver in Kolkata and hardly earns Rs.10,000/-
to Rs. 12,000/- per month. Still the learned Principal Judge,
without considering the financial position of the petitioner, has
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.464 of 2021 dt.01-07-2024
2/4
directed him to make payment of Rs.6,000/- per month to the
respondent as interim maintenance from the date of application.
The learned Principal Judge has also not taken into consideration
that petitioner is only a matriculate whereas the respondent lady
is a post-graduate and could easily take care of her needs as well
as the need of the child. Learned counsel further submits that
petitioner is ready and willing to keep his wife and daughter with
honour and dignity but the respondent is not agreeable to the
proposal. Since the learned family court has not considered all
the facts and circumstances, the impugned order is not
sustainable. The petitioner was also compelled to file a suit for
restitution of conjugal rights being Matrimonial Suit No. 1800 of
2017 in the District of North-24-Parganas. Learned counsel
further submits that the petitioner is even willing to pay the
interim amount of maintenance if it is reduced keeping in view
the fact that petitioner is a taxi driver and earns a meager amount
towards his monthly income.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that
there is no merit in the present petition and it has been filed only
to deny the interim maintenance to the respondent. Till the
passing of the impugned order no payment has been made of any
amount to the respondent. Learned counsel further submits that
the amount of interim maintenance could not be said to be
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.464 of 2021 dt.01-07-2024
3/4
excessive as the petitioner has other sources of income. The
respondent was tortured and treated with cruelty and she was
driven out from her matrimonial home. She is living in a
wretched condition and petitioner being the husband is duty
bound to maintain his wife and his daughter. The purpose of
Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to save the
wife from destitution and vagrancy. When the daily wages in
Bihar have reached an amount of approximately Rs. 400/- per
day, it is unfair on the part of the petitioner to make such
submission that Rs.6,000/- per month which comes to Rs.200/-
per day is an excessive amount. Whatever may be the claim of
the petitioner against respondent and allegation and counter
allegation, the same could be looked into by the learned family
court while disposing of the maintenance petition. The
maintenance case is pending since 2019 and the petitioner has
not made payment of the interim maintenance amount since the
date of filing of the case. This shows the contentions made on
behalf of the petitioner are devoid of any merit and not made in
good faith. The petitioner lacks bona fide and his petition needs
to be thrown out at the admission itself.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
the rival submission of the parties, I am unable to convince
myself that Rs.6,000/- per month as ordered by learned Principal
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.464 of 2021 dt.01-07-2024
4/4
Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur at Ara in the year 2019 is an
excessive amount. Further considering the fact that the said
maintenance amount has been allowed as interim maintenance for
the respondent and her daughter, I do not think the impugned order
needs any interference and hence the same is affirmed.
6. Furthermore, the petitioner is directed to make the
payment of the interim amount to the respondent in terms of orders
of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur at Ara dated
16.12.2019
within three months from the date of this order and
learned family court is directed to ensure that payment is made
during this period. Learned Family Court is further directed to take
immediate steps for disposal of Maintenance Case No. 216 of
2017 pending before it within four months of the date of receipt of
copy of this order. If the learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Bhojpur at Ara finds any possibility of settlement in the matter, he
will personally try to reconcile the matter.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition
stands dismissed.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
anuradha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE -
Uploading Date 03.07.2024
Transmission Date -
