Disposed

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2024CRLR/220/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a revision challenging an order enhancing monthly maintenance. The Court found the quantum reasonable but allowed payment of arrears in four quarterly installments to accommodate the petitioner's financial constraints, provided future payments are timely.

What did the court decide?

Revisionist permitted to pay arrears of maintenance in four equal quarterly installments; impugned order quashing avoided; future monthly maintenance to continue.

Sanjay Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:21912

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 220 of 2024 Revisionist :- Sanjay Kumar

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others

¶5

Counsel for Revisionist :- Padmakar Nath Tripathi,Aditya Kumar,Jatin Gajwani

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶8

Heard Sri Padmakar Nath Tripathi, the learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Anurag Verma, the learned A.G.A.-I appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

¶9

By means of the instant revision filed under Section 19 (4) of the Family Court Act the revisionist has challenged the impugned order dated 24.11.2023, passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.3, Lucknow in Case No.817 of 2013, whereby the revisionist has been directed to pay Rs.1,000/- per month only to the opposite parties no.2 to 5 from the date of filing of application. The opposite part no.2 is wife of the revisionist and the opposite parties no.3 to 5 are his sons and daghter. The maintenance was payable to the children till they attain majority. Further the revisionist has been directed to pay Rs.3500/- as maintenance to the opposite party no.2 since the date of decision.

¶10

The learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the amount awarded as maintenance is excessive keeping in view the meager income of the revisionist as in the year 2018 the revisionist used to earn Rs.8,000/- per month and presently he is earning Rs.15,000/- per month.

¶11

On 06.09.2023 the learned Family Court had passed an order directing the revisionist to pay Rs.500/- per month as interim maintenance to his children and the amount payable toward

¶12

maintenance pendente lite has been enhanced to Rs.1,000/- by means of the impugned order. Even if the revisionist had a meager income the amount awarded as an interim maintenance to his children i.e. Rs.500/- per month was also too meager and there is no illegality in fixing this meager amount of interim maintenance in favour of the revisionist's children which amount has subsequently been enhanced to Rs.1000/- only.

¶13

The quantum of maintenance awarded to the opposite parties does not appear to be unreasonable.

¶14

The learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist has paid a sum of Rs.60,000/- in all and the remaining amount is still to be paid by him. He has also submitted that in spite of good intentions the revisionist is unable to pay entire arrears of maintenance in one lump sum due to his financial constraints.

¶15

Accordingly, the revision is disposed of finally by providing that the revisionist may pay the entire amount of arrears of maintenance payable by him in four equal quarterly installments, the first of which will be payable within 30 days from today. While doing so the revisionist will continue to pay monthly amount of maintenance to the opposite party no.2. In case the revisionist keeps on paying installments no proceedings for execution of the impugned order shall be drawn against him. However, the benefit of this order will not be available to the revisionist in case he commits default in payment of any of the installments.

¶16

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 13.3.2024 Ram.

¶18

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 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

Ram Bilas Alias Mithun Kashyap and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs Civil Sedcret. Lko. and Another

Aniruddh Singh Thru. His Son Bhupendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Law, Sectt. Lucknow and 2 Others

Ashish Kumar Verma and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Ramjan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Abdul Raees Alias Danish Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others