Dismissed

Pawan Kumar Srivas v. Smt. Kiran Srivas

Chhattisgarh HC5 Sept 2023CRR/148/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision against Family Court order granting maintenance. High Court upheld the order after finding the wife had sufficient cause for separation and typical interpretation of applicant's economic status did not warrant interference.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed; impugned order upholding maintenance of Rs. 2,500/- for wife and Rs. 2,000/- for minor daughter remains in force.

Pawan Kumar Srivas Vs Smt. Kiran Srivas — Maintenance and Alimony | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Order reserved on : 21-06-2023

¶5

Order passed on : 05/09/2023

¶6

Criminal Revision No. 148 of 2020

¶7

Pawan Kumar Srivas S/o Shri Noubatram Srivas, aged about 33 years, R/o Quarter No. M.Q-652, Dipka Colony, P.S. Dipka, Tahsil & District Korba (CG)

¶8

---- Applicants

¶9

Versus

¶10

Smt. Kiran Srivas, W/o Shri Pawan Kumar Srivas, D/o Shri Narayan Srivas, aged about 29 years, R/o Police Line Bilaspur, P.S. Civil Line, Tahsil Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)

¶11

Ku. Arpita Srivas, S/o Shri Pawan Kumar Srivas, aged about 01 years, Minor, represented by her mother Smt. Kiran Srivas, W/o Shri Pawan Kumar Srivas, D/o Shri Narayan Srivas, aged about 29 years, R/o Police Line Bilaspur, P.S. Civil Line, Tahsil Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)

¶12

---- Non-applicants

¶13

For Applicant : Ms. Sakshi Bali, Advocate. For Non-applicants : Mr. Roop Naik, Advocate

¶14

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey

¶15

CAV Order

¶16

This revision petition under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act has been filed against the order dated 11.12.2019 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur in MJC No.195/2017 whereby the application under Section 125 of CrPC filed by the nonapplicants has been partly allowed and Rs.2,500/- p.m. has been granted as maintenance in favour of non-applicant No.1 and Rs.2,000/-

¶17

¶18

p.m. in favour of non-applicant No.2 from the date of passing of the order.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned Court below has granted maintenance without appreciating the evidence available on record. It is proved that non-applicant No.1/wife is living separately from the applicant without any just and reasonable cause. She has admitted the fact that the applicant never treated her with cruelty and she left the house of the applicant voluntarily because the applicant refused her proposal to live with her at her parental house. The applicant also filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right which was decreed in his favour vide judgment and decree dated 15.3.2019 passed in Civil Suit No.54-A/2017 but the non-applicant No.1/wife did not appear before the learned Executing Court, therefore, the case was closed by the Court vide order dated 16.10.2019. Learned Family Court has failed to consider the fact that the applicant is an unemployed person and has no source of income whereas non-applicant No.1/wife is able to maintain herself. The amount awarded by the learned Family Court is on the higher side in the given facts and circumstances of the case and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside and appropriate order may be passed.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the nonapplicants has supported the impugned order.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶22

Before the Family Court, both the parties examined themselves

¶23

¶24

as witness. Applicant/husband admitted the fact that some abusive messages were sent by him to non-applicant No.1/wife through his mobile. It is also clear from the statements of the witnesses that the applicant/husband left non-applicant No.1/wife at her parental house. It is also admitted by the applicant that he did not pay hospital bills of delivery of his child. Thus, the learned Family Court has rightly found that non-applicant No.1/wife has sufficient cause for living separately from the applicant/husband.

¶25

NAW-3 Santosh Kumar Srivas, cousin of the applicant, has admitted this fact that the applicant was doing computer and photocopy work at home. The applicant (NAW-1) and his father Noubatram Srivas (NAW-2) have also admitted that at the time of marriage, the applicant was doing the computer and photocopy work at home and earning income from it.

¶26

Thus, the learned Family Court after proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the socio-economic status of the parties and the requirements of the non-applicants, granted maintenance @ Rs.2,500/- p.m. in favour of non-applicant No.1/wife and Rs.2,000/- p.m. in favour of non-applicant No.2/daughter from the date of passing of the order. This Court finds no illegality or perversity in the impugned order warranting any interference by this Court.

¶27

In the result, the revision petition being without any substance is liable to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶28

Sd/ (Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶29

Khan

Pawan Kumar Srivas v. Smt. Kiran Srivas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar Srivas v. Smt. Kiran Srivas

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

Dashrath Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajkishor Mishra Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Pooja Chandrakar Vs Avinash Dilliwar

Smt. Devkumari Vs Smt. Pardeshnin Bai

Rajendra Gawalani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Naseeb Khan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh