In a criminal revision challenging a Family Court order granting maintenance to a sick wife, the High Court examined the applicant's unwillingness to keep his wife and her medical needs. Holding that the awarded amount was neither exorbitant nor disproportionate, the court rejected the revision.
The criminal revision was rejected.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No. 319 of 2016
Jayant Kumar Dadu S/o S. G. Dabu Aged About 34 Years R/o Kailash Nagar, Distt. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
---- Applicant
Versus
Smt. Tripti @ Shubi Dadu W/o Jayant Kumar Dahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Qr. No. 20 / 2, South Vasundara Nagar, Bhilai-3, Distt. Durg Chhattisgarh
----Non-Applicant
For Applicant: Shri Aditya Bharadwaj, Advocate. For Non-Applicant: Shri Rudranath Mukherjee, Advocate.
Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri P. Sam Koshy, J Order On Board
14.6.2016
2
maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the Non-Applicant is on the higher side and therefore, the same deserves to be interfered with.
3
approximately Rs.2,000/- per month for medical expenses, this Court is of the opinion that the maintenance amount awarded by the Court below cannot be said to be exorbitant nor can it be said to be disproportionate to the income of the present Applicant calling for any interference with the impugned order.
Sd/(P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE
Priya
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Family Court's order granting maintenance to a sick wife given the husband's income and unwillingness to maintain her.
Whether the maintenance amount awarded by the Family Court is exorbitant or disproportionate to the applicant's income.
Jayant Kumar Dadu
P. Sam Koshy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
