Disposed¶17

Ganga v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2025CRLR/1130/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ganga v. State of U.P. and Another, Criminal Revision No. 1130 of 2025 (CRLR No. 1130 of 2025), High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Harvir Singh, J., decided November 13, 2025. Revision against interim maintenance order dated 01.02.2025 of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kushinagar fixing Rs. 8,000/-. Disposed of without adjudicating merits; both parties at liberty to adduce evidence; Family Court to decide finally in accordance with law; trial court to proceed per law. No statute or precedent cited. Opposite party no. 2 not named in the text.

What did the court decide?

No interference with the impugned interim maintenance order; revision disposed of with liberty to both parties to adduce evidence before the Family Court, which is to decide the matter finally in accordance with law. ¶17

Ganga vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1130 of 2025

Ganga

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	: Rahul Mishra, Sanjay Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 90

¶7

HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

No one has appeared on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.

¶10

The instant revision has been filed against the order dated 01.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kushinagar by which a sum of Rs. 8000/- has been fixed as interim maintenance.

¶11

It is the contention of learned counsel for the revisionist that, the revisionist some time earlier, has made an attempt to declare that, his father namely Uday Bhan has died and had some ill intention to sell, disposed of or alienate the entire property. Learned counsel for the revisionist further argued that the father of the revisionist is still alive, therefore, it is impossible to inherit the property of the father of the revisionist under normal circumstances as long as the father of the revisionist is alive. Unless otherwise property shall dwell by way of law or by legal proceeding. Learned counsel for the revisionist has laslty submitted that, a sum of Rs. 8000/- fixed as interim maintenance is excessive and higher side, and the revisionist is unable to pay the said amount and therefore, the order of the current payment and the arrears is liable to be set aside.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that, it was the connivance of the revisionist and his father that by declaring the father as dead, the revisionist has ill intention to dispose of and alienate the entire property, so that, there is no source of income of property and tried to get rid off the maintenance amount likely to be paid to

¶13

CRLR No. 1130 of 2025

¶14

¶15

the opposite party no. 2 and that is why the concerned trial court has passed an order directing the revisionist not to alienate any property whatsoever.

¶16

Under circumstances, since it is only an order granting interim maintenance and the entire facts, evidence or issues are yet to be decided, therefore, the notice to the revisionist and the opposite parties, both the parties are be at liberty to adduce their respective evidence in support of their contentions before the learned Family Court and the learned Family Court shall decide the matter in accordance with law, finally.

¶17

Under such circumstances, the present revision is hereby disposed of.

¶18

It is made clear that the learned trial court shall proceed in accordance with law.

¶19

November 13, 2025 Vikram

¶20

(Harvir Singh,J.)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ganga v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganga v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd Ashraf vs State of Up and Another

Rinku Kumar vs State of Up and 2 Others

Swatantra Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepak vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rohit Nagar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Veerpal vs State of U.P. and Another