Dismissed

Tarun Kumar Sharma v. Smt. Shradha Sharma

Chhattisgarh HC23 Aug 2022CRR/92/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision challenging a Family Court order awarding maintenance, the High Court permitted the petitioner husband to withdraw the petition. The withdrawal was allowed as the parties had amicably settled their dispute and a divorce decree had been passed. Consequently, the revision was dismissed as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the criminal revision; revision dismissed as withdrawn.

Tarun Kumar Sharma Vs Smt. Shradha Sharma — Maintenance and Alimony | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Criminal Revision No. 92 of 2016

¶5

Tarun Kumar Sharma son of Shri Bijendra Sharma, aged about 33 years, R/o Near Panchmukhi Hanuman Mandir, Ward No. 61, Laxminarayan Das Ward, Bandhwapara, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.)

¶6

---- Petitioner/Non-Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Smt. Shradha Sharma, W/o Tarun Kumar Sharma, aged about 32 years (D/o Shri Vedram Brambhatth), R/o Near Dena Bank, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶9

----Respondent/Applicant

¶10

For Petitioner/Non-Applicant	: Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate
For Respondent/Applicant	: Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Advocate appears on
	behalf of Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate

¶11

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶12

23.08.2022

¶13

The petitioner/husband has filed this revision under Section 19 (4) of the Family Courts Act against the order dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Family Court, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) in Misc.Criminal Case No. 89/2015, whereby, the Family Court has awarded Rs.2,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent/wife.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner/husband submits that the parties have amicably settled the dispute between them and on an application moved by both the parties under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, the decree of divorce has been passed in Civil Suit No. 185/15 on 23.02.2018 by Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur and at present there is no dispute. Therefore, he seeks to withdraw this revision.

¶15

Considering the fact that counsel for the petitioner wants to withdraw this revision as there is no dispute regarding grant of maintenance and

¶16

¶17

consequence thereof would be that the order passed by the Family Court will attain finality. Learned counsel for the respondent/wife has no objection, if counsel for the petitioner withdraws this revision.

¶18

On prayer made by leaned counsel for petitioner/husband, permission is granted to the petitioner to withdraw this criminal revision.

¶19

Consequently, this criminal revision is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶22

vatti

Tarun Kumar Sharma v. Smt. Shradha Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Kumar Sharma v. Smt. Shradha Sharma

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

Similar cases

Chhattisgarh Sahkari Sakh Samiti Maryadit Vs Jagnik Yadav

Nandlal Nihlani Vs Ajay Yadav

Trivenibai Vs Devsingh

Dinesh Kumar Sharma Vs A.R. Khan and Anr.

Raj Kumar Rawani and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Akhilesh Kumar Dubey Vs Smt.Seema Dubey