Cr. Rev. pending against Family Court order directing payment of maintenance to wife and daughter. High Court found no good ground for interference as the quantum was reasonable considering a prior settlement of Rs.81,000/-.
The revision is dismissed, enabling the maintenance order of Rs.1500/- to wife and Rs.500/- to daughter to stand.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 452 of 2018
Revisionist :- Sameer Ansari
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Birendra Shanker Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and perused the material brought on record.
By way of the instant revision, challenge has been made to the order dated 07.11.2017 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonbhadra, in Misc. Case No.351 of 2014 Majmun Nisha and another Vs. Sameer Ansari, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Dhuddhi, District Sonbhadra whereby the revisionist has been directed to pay Rs.1500/- to his wife - opposite party no.2 and Rs.500/- to his daughter - opposite party no.3 per month from the date of the order.
Upon careful consideration of the merit of this case, obviously the amount of maintenance awarded in favour of opposite party nos.2 and 3 does not appear to be either excessive or exorbitant, for the reason that plea of one time settlement arrived at between the parties even if taken to be true to all intents and purposes then the total amount of settlement is confined up to Rs.81,000/-, that by itself and by no stretch of imagination can be said to be amount exorbitant and fully enough to maintain two persons like present one opposite party nos.2 and 3. No good ground for interference is made.
Consequently, this revision is dismissed.
Order Date :- 12.2.2018 rkg
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the maintenance amount awarded of Rs.1500/- to wife and Rs.500/- to daughter is excessive warranting revisional interference.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sameer Ansari
Nisha Majmun
State Of U.P.
Other
Arvind Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
