Allowed

Tabassum v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2022CRLR/2537/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision allowed. The High Court enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs. 5000/- to Rs. 8000/- per month for the respondent to pay the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C., disregarding the petitioner's MBA qualifications, and ordered payment of arrears for the period of pendency.

What did the court decide?

Maintenance enhanced to Rs. 8000/- per month. Arrears of Rs. 4000/month from filing to order date directed to be paid in six equal instalments.

Tabassum Vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2537 of 2017

¶3

Revisionist :- Tabassum Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Amit Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Tawvab Ahmed Khan

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has produced the salary slip of the opposite party no.2 for the month of February, 2022, which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Tawvab Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present revision has been filed for setting aside the Judgement and order dated 19.06.2017 passed by learned Family Court/Fast Track Court No.1, District Bareilly in Case No. 2897 of 2014 (Smt. Tabassum Vs. Shahid Khan) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Police Station Izzatnagar, District Bareilly, so far as it relates to quantum of maintenance amount to the tune of Rs. 5000/-

¶8

Learned counsel for the revisionist contends that the revisionist is a deserted lady, who has no source of income. The learned Family Court has granted meagre maintenance amount from the date of order, which is illegal and the same ought to have been granted from the date of filing application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. He further submits that the opposite party no.2 is a Government employee earning handsome salary, therefore the amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 5000/- is a meagre amount and thus the same is liable to be enhanced by this Court.

¶9

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the revisionist is a qualified lady and is M.B.A. who is herself earning handsome amount and thus she is not entitled for grant of maintenance. He further submits that there is no illegality, or perversity in the impugned order and as such the same is liable to be confirmed by this Court.

¶10

Perusal of the record shows that the marriage between the parties is not disputed and no such finding with regard to the income of the revisionist has been recorded. The record also reflects that no any arrangement for maintenance was ever

¶11

made by revisionist. Learned Family Court has taken much pain in analyzing the evidence adduced before it and has granted maintenance to the tune of Rs.5000/- to the revisionist.

¶12

It goes without saying that the instant revision was filed in the year 2017, wherein the Judgement and order dated 19.06.2017 has been under challenged, which is pending since then. More than five years have lapsed, during these five years, the prices of the essential commodities have become almost double. The salary slip of the opposite party no.2 which has been produced before this Court also shows gross salary of the opposite party no.2 is Rs.43717/- per month, thus it is necessary in the interest of justice that the amount of maintenance amount as awarded by the learned Court below is liable to be enhanced.

¶13

Accordingly, the Judgement and order dated 19.06.2017 is set aside so far as it relates to grant of quantum amount of maintenance.

¶14

The opposite party no.2 is directed to pay to pay Rs. 8000/- per month as monthly maintenance amount to the revisionist by 7th of each calender month. So far as grant of maintenance amount from the date of filing application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to the date of order is concerned, it is directed that for the said period, the opposite party no.2 shall pay Rs. 4000/- per month, which amount comes to Rs. 1,30,000/- and shall be paid in six equal monthly instalments. The first instalment shall be paid on or before 05.05.2022, second instalment shall be paid on or before 05.06.2022 and so on.

¶15

The revision, is accordingly allowed.

¶16

Order Date :- 5.4.2022 S.Ali

¶17

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.04.07 13:44:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tabassum v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tabassum v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Chhedi Singh Vs State of U.P.and Another

Smt. Sithlesh Singh and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Vipin Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Hari Shankar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and Others

Smt. Shraddha Pal and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others