Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1371 of 2018 Revisionist :- Manoj Bharti Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Ch. Dil Nisar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present revision has been filed against the order passed by learned Principal Judge Family Court, Saharanpur, dated 27.2.2018, by which the monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs. 4000/- per month has been awarded to the applicant's sun (opposite party no.3) from the date of that order.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the award of maintenance allowance @ Rs. 4000/- against the applicant is wholly unjustified inasmuch the opposite party no.2 who is the mother of the opposite party no.3 is a highly qualified lady holding M.A. and B.Ed degrees. It has also been submitted that she is gainfully employed and is earning about 30,000/- per month by way of salary by teaching at a degree college. On the other hand, it has been submitted that the applicant is holding degree of diploma from the polytechnic. He is presently unemployed and therefore, he would not able to provide maintenance allowance as awarded.
Perusal of the order dated 27.2.2018 reveals that the applicant had been unable to establish that the opposite party no.2 was gainfully employed or that she had a regular job or income. Therefore, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that the maintenance allowance could not have been awarded against the applicant because the opposite party no.2 was gainfully employed, does not have legs to stand.
As to the argument that the applicant does not have a job or income from which he may provide maintenance allowance as awarded, it is undisputed that the applicant has a diploma from the polytechnic and he is an able bodied person. No evidence was led by the opposite party no.2 to establish any regular job or regular income of the applicant. Learned Court below has also not made any estimation of the income of the applicant but has provided for maintenance allowance @ Rs, 4000/- per month on a general notion, that such amount would be necessary to provide for means of sustenance to the opposite party no.3.
Learned counsel for the applicant then ubmits that in any case the award should not have been in excess of Rs. 2000/-. It appears that the opposite party no.3 is aged about 9 years and his requirements would be growing by the day.
Considering the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the revision pending in view of the order proposed to be passed, keeping in mind the interest of opposite parties.
Leaving it open to the opposite party to apply for recall of this order, if advised, the instant revision is disposed of with the following directions:-
1. The award of monthly maintenance allowance is modified to Rs. 3000/- in place of Rs. 4,000/- per month, in favour of opposite party no. 3, from the date of the impugned order.
2. The applicant shall continue to pay monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs. 3,000/- per month to the opposite party no.3 from the date of the impugned order, such that the amount of Rs. 9,000/- towards monthly maintenance allowance from the period February, 2018 to April, 2018 shall be paid by the applicant to opposite parties on or before 31.05.2018 or be deposited before the learned court below within that time.
3. Further, the applicant shall continue to pay to opposite party no. 3 or deposit before the learned court below, monthly maintenance allowance for the period May, 2018 onwards as and when it becomes due, under the impugned order, at the aforesaid rates i.e. @ Rs. 3,000/- per month.
Subject to aforesaid compliance being made, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant.
All the amounts if deposited by the applicant in the Court below shall be released to the opposite party no. 3 forthwith.
However, it is made clear that in the event of failure on part of the applicant to comply with any part of the order, coercive measures be revived from that stage without any further reference to this Court.
Order Date :- 27.4.2018 Mini