Patna High Court
Badri Narayan Pandey vs Meena Devi on 25 February, 2025
Author: Arun Kumar Jha
Bench: Arun Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.623 of 2024
======================================================
Badri Narayan Pandey S/o- Late Jagdish Pandey, R/o Village- Giviya, P.S-
Durgawati, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Meena Devi W/o- Badri Narayan Pandey, D/o-Late Ram Janam Tiwari, R/o
Village- Giviya, P.S- Durgawati, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. At present R/o
Village- Kuddi, P.S- Chand, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashutosh Tripathy, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Aquaib Khan, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 25-02-2025
Record taken up on mentioning being made on behalf
of the petitioner and I intend to dispose of the present petition at
the stage of admission itself.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated
09.04.2024
passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Kaimur at Bhabhua in Maintenance Case No. 50M of 2023,
whereby and whereunder an amount of Rs. 10,000/- has been
ordered to be paid to the respondent by way of interim
maintenance with effect from the date of application, i.e.,
27.02.2024.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is mainly aggrieved by the fact that 4 acres of land of
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.623 of 2024 dt.25-02-2025
the petitioner is being cultivated by the respondent with the help
of her younger son and this fact has not been taken up for
consideration while passing the impugned order. The petitioner
is a retired teacher and solely depends on his pension which is
Rs.36,000/- per month. The petitioner is aged about 78 years
and he has to meet all his expenses from the pension but this
fact was also not taken into consideration. Learned counsel
further submits that except for pension the petitioner is not
having any other income. The petitioner is still ready and
willing to keep his wife. In the circumstances, the learned trial
court passed the order for grant of interim maintenance of
Rs.10,000/- per month which is not stated to be correct and
proper.
5. Perused the records.
6. From perusal of the record I find that the learned
Principal Judge passed the order of interim maintenance after
considering the abovenoted submissions of the petitioner.
Admittedly the petitioner has been getting pension of
Rs.36,000/- per month and the Maintenance Case No. 50M of
2023 is yet to be finally disposed of. In these circumstances, I
do not find any infirmity in the impugned order since the order
of interim maintenance has been passed after considering the
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.623 of 2024 dt.25-02-2025
rival submission of the parties and this Court would not like to
interfere in a routine order in a matter which is still pending
before the learned Family Court for final disposal.
7. In the light of the discussion made hereinbefore, I
do not find any merit in the present petition and the same is
dismissed.
8. However, the learned trial court is directed to
expedite the trial and dispose of Maintenance Case No. 50M of
2023 at the earliest.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
DKS/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 27.02.2025
Transmission Date NA
