Partly allowed

Shrihari Agrihari Alias Hari Gupta v. Smt. Parul Agrahari and Others

Allahabad HC4 Mar 2024CRLR/204/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act challenging a Section 125 CrPC maintenance order, the court issued an interim stay on the wife's maintenance pending notice and mediation, while leaving the son's maintenance order unaltered.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the impugned order regarding maintenance to the wife only; maintenance to the minor son remains in operation.

Shrihari Agrihari Alias Hari Gupta vs Smt. Parul… — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 204 of 2024

¶3

Revisionist :- Shrihari Agrihari Alias Hari Gupta Opposite Party :- Smt. Parul Agrahari And Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Pal Singh Yadav,Ashish Kumar Singh,Prathama Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1. Heard Sri Pal Singh Yadav learned counsel appearing for the revisionist and Sri Anurag Verma, learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

2. By means of the instant revision filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, the revisionist has challenged the validity of the ex parte order dated 24.1.2024 passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby the Family Court has directed the revisionist to pay maintenance to opposite party No.1 and 2, his wife and his minor son respectively.

¶7

3. Submission of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that opposite party No.1 had filed Suit No.129 of 2021 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights, the revisionist was defendant in the suit and he admitted the claim of the plaintiff. Accordingly, suit was decreed on the basis of admission by means of an order dated 18.12.2023 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow. In spite of aforesaid suit for restitution of conjugal rights filed by opposite party No.1 having been decreed on the basis of admission made by the revisionist, opposite party No.1 did not resume cohabitation with the revisionist.

¶8

The learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that in the aforesaid circumstances the revisionist cannot be made liable to pay any amount of maintenance to opposite party No.1.

¶9

5. The matter requires consideration .

¶10

6. Issue notice to opposite party Nos.1 and 2 returnable at an early date.

¶11

7. List in the week commencing 22.04.2024.

¶12

8. The learned counsel for the revisionist has stated that the revisionist is ready and willing to make efforts to settled the dispute through the process of mediation.

¶13

9. Upon appearance of opposite party No.1, the case may be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this court subject to her willingness to refer the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation centre of this Court.

¶14

10. Keeping in view the aforesaid, it is provided that the operation and effect of the impugned order dated 24.1.2024, so far as it directed the revisionist to pay maintenance including the arrears to his wifeopposite party No.1 shall remain stayed. However, it is clarified that the order of payment of maintenance including arrears to the son of the revisionist-opposite party No.2 has not been stayed by this Court.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.3.2024 prateek

¶16

Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shrihari Agrihari Alias Hari Gupta v. Smt. Parul Agrahari and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrihari Agrihari Alias Hari Gupta v. Smt. Parul Agrahari and Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Suresh Kumar Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Urban Development Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Mubin Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Food/Civil Supply, Govt. U.P. Lucknow and 4 Others

Shiv Shankar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko and 2 Others

Sriram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Ramu Prasad vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Amresh Kumar vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Distt. Shrawasti and 3 Others