Dismissed

Lal Chand Bind v. State of U.P. and 3 Other

Allahabad HC11 Dec 2019A482/43573/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 Cr.P.C. application, the High Court upheld the imposition of a cost of Rs.40,000/- against the applicant for delaying a recall application in a maintenance case, finding no illegality in the order despite the applicant's partial payment of dues.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is directed to deposit the cost of Rs.40,000/- within 15 days; the application to quash the order imposing cost is dismissed.

Lal Chand Bind Vs State of U.P. and 3 Other — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43573 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Lal Chand Bind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Other Counsel for Applicant :- Tulsi Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the part of the impugned order in respect of imposing cost of Rs.40,000/- for allowing the recall application under Section 126(3) of Cr.P.C. and for recalling the order dated 03.11.2004 in Crl. Misc. Case No.271 of 2003 (Parvatiya Vs. Lal Chand), under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Ghazipur and other consequential order dated 16.10.2019 passed in Crl. Misc. Case No.644 of 2018 (Lal Chand Vs. Smt. Parvatiya & others), under Section 126 (2) of Cr.P.C., passed by Family Court, Ghazipur, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghazipur.

¶7

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the opposite party has filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against the applicant and the same was registered as Misc. Case No.271 of 2003 (Parvatiya Vs. Lal Chand) on 16.07.2004. The court proceeded ex parte and directed the applicant to pay 1500/- per month to opposite party no.2 from the date of application vide order dated 03.11.2004. On 05.01.2005 application under Section 128 Cr.P.C. was filed by opposite party no.2 for recovery of arrears. Another application dated 07.04.2016 was filed for the recovery of the amount. On 27.07.2017 the Family Court directed the District Magistrate, Gazipur to recover the amount of Rs.2,83,250/- from the applicant. Previously, prior to passing of the aforesaid orders, the applicant had moved an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for recalling the ex-parte order dated 03.11.2004 and moved an application on 22.01.2007 for recalling the ex-parte order dated 03.11.2004. On 18.10.2019 the recall application of the applicant had been considered and the same had been allowed imposing cost of Rs.40,000/- and the order dated 03.11.2004 was set aside and matter was fixed for further hearing.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has paid amount of Rs.2,83,250/- on 09.10.2018 to the

¶9

opposite party no.2 and, therefore, he requested that the order imposing the cost may be set aside since 03.11.2004.

¶10

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, I find that the amount of Rs.3,60,000/- is due over the applicant, out of which he has only paid Rs.2,83,250/- and since this recall was pending since 2007, the cost of Rs.40,000/has rightly been imposed. There is no illegality or infirmity in the order impugned herein.

¶11

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant is directed to deposit cost of Rs.40,000/- within 15 days from today, if not deposited, and to approach the Family Court for any other grievance.

¶12

The application stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 11.12.2019 Anand Sri./-

Lal Chand Bind v. State of U.P. and 3 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lal Chand Bind v. State of U.P. and 3 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ummed and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepak Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Bahadur Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umesh and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mayank Sharma and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Lal Bihari Vs State of U.P. and Anr.