Nahida Begam And Anr vs The State Of Tripura And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 1676 Tri

Tripura High Court

Nahida Begam And Anr vs The State Of Tripura And Anr on 26 September, 2024

Author: T. Amarnath Goud

Bench: T. Amarnath Goud

                                 Page 1 of 3




                        HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                              AGARTALA
                        CRL.REV.P NO.42 OF 2024

     Nahida Begam and anr.
                                                  ......Petitioner(s)

                                 Versus

     The State of Tripura and anr.
                                               .....Respondent(s)

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.C. Rathor, Advocate.

Mr. D.C. Saha, Advocate.

Mr. S.H. Ikbal, Advocate.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Debnath, Advocate.

Date of hearing and delivery of Judgment & Order : 26.09.2024

Whether fit for reporting : NO.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL)

This present criminal revision petition has

been filed for enhancement of the monthly maintenance

awarded to the petitioners herein @ Rs.7,000/- per month

(Rs.4,000/- for the wife petitioner and Rs.3,000/- for the minor

child) vide Judgment/Order dated 07.02.2024 passed in

Crl.Misc.27 of 2021 by learned Family Court, Agartala, West

Tripura.

2. Heard Mr. P. Rathor, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr.B. Debnath, learned

counsel appearing for the respondent-husband.

3. Mr. P. Rathor, learned counsel appearing for

the petitioners submits that the monthly maintenance of

Rs.7,000/- awarded by the Court below in favour of his clients is

on the lower side and the same is not sufficient to maintain their

daily expenses. Learned counsel also added that other than the

maintenance amount his clients have no other source of income.

4. On the other hand, Mr. B. Debnath, learned

counsel appearing for the husband-respondent submits that his

client is working as a Government employee in the post of

MPW(Male) under SDMO, Teliamura, Khowai District Tripura and

his monthly salary is Rs.31,623/-. Learned Counsel further

submits that his client has to pay rent and also has to maintain

his parents. As such, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent-husband urged this Court to not increase the

maintenance amount and to confirm the award as given by the

Court below.

5. Heard and perused the evidence on record.

6. This Court is of the opinion that the monthly

maintenance of Rs.7,000/- awarded to the petitioners by the

Court below is on the lower side considering the rising cost of

living, inflation, and the financial needs of the child, particularly

regarding education and health care. As such, considering the

monthly income of the respondent-husband as placed on record,

this Court is increasing the monthly maintenance to be awarded

to the petitioners herein from Rs.7,000/- per month to

Rs.10,000/- per month i.e. Rs.5,000/- for each of the

petitioners.

7. With the above observation and direction,

this present petition is allowed. The impugned Judgment dated

07.02.2024 is modified to the extent indicated above. Other than

the above direction, other aspects of the impugned Judgment

shall remain unaltered.

8. As a sequel, stay if any stands vacated.

Pending application(s), if any also stands closed.

JUDGE

Suhanjit

RAJKUMAR Digitally RAJKUMAR signed by

SUHANJIT SUHANJIT SINGHA Date: 2024.09.30 SINGHA 11:51:52 +05'30'