Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5404 of 2011 Revisionist :- Alka Rani @ Payal & Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Revisionist :- V.K. Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Ashok Trivedi,Rahul Trivedi
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 17.09.2011 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gorakhpur in Case No. 560 of 2004, Smt. Alka Rani and another vs. Rajesh Agarwal under Section 125 Cr.P.C. praying for enhancement of the amount of maintenance awarded by the court below.
The revisionist no. 1 is the wife of the opposite party no. 2 and revisionist no. 2 is the minor son of opposite party no. 2. The court below has recorded the findings that there are number of business in the name of the brother of the revisionist, Krishna Mohan and there is no business recorded in the name of opposite party no. 2. However the court has found that the opposite party no. 2 is working with his brother and he is capable to maintaining the revisionists who prayed for award of maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month. The Court has recorded the finding that the opposite party can earn atleast Rs. 5000/- per month.
The counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has vehemently opposed this revision on the ground that he has no independent source of income and his elder brother, Krishna Mohan is the proprietor of the firm and he is not partner therein. The business is not joint between brothers. He has further submitted that the revisionist no. 1 has implicated the entire family of the opposite party no. 2 in criminal case under Sections 498-A etc. The entire family is being harrased by the revisionist no. 1. The applicant has lots of family responsibilities. He has a old mother to lookafter and his brother is also paralysed below the limb and he has to look after them in the house and also manage the business to his brother.
After hearing the rival contentions it appears that the amount of maintenance awarded to the revisionist no. 1 does not calls for any interference. However the revisionist no. 2, the minor son of the revisionist no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 is entitled to enhancement of maintenance amount from the Rs. 500/- to 1,500/- because at the time of award to the maintenance amount he was a minor aged about 7 years and now he is aged about 14 years. It is the time when the requirements of money for meeting the expenses of school and other expenses are much higher. However, there is no definite proof of income of the opposite party no. 2 on record. Only further amount of Rs. 1000/- is being directed to paid to the revisionist no. 2, the minor son of opposite party no. 2 in addition to the amount of Rs. 500/- directed to be paid earlier by the court below.
This revision is partly allowed.
Order Date :- 24.9.2018 Rohit