In this criminal revision under the Family Court Act, 1984, against an order awarding maintenance to the wife and son of the revisionist, the High Court found no error of law or facts in the lower court's decision and dismissed the revision.
Revision dismissed without any changes to the impugned maintenance award.
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. - 10
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 436 of 2018
Revisionist :- Mukesh Kumar Tripathi @ Bauwan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Ors. Counsel for Revisionist :- Vidhu Bhushan,Vineeta Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Present revision under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, 1984 has been filed against the judgment and order dated 12.04.2018 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Fast Track Court No.1, Unnao awarding maintenance of Rs.3,000/- to the wife of the revisionist and Rs.4,000/- to the son of the revisionist.
2. I have gone through the judgment and perused the record. I do not find that learned Court below has committed any error of law or facts in passing the impugned order awarding meager amount of maintenance to the wife and son of the revisionist.
3. Thus, this revision being devoid of merit and substance, is hereby dismissed.
( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. )
Order Date :- 21.7.2022 prateek
Digitally signed by PRATEEK ARORA Date: 2022.07.21 18:28:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order awarding maintenance to the wife and son of the revisionist committed any error of law or facts.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mukesh Kumar Tripathi @ Bauwan
State Of U.P. And Ors.
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
