Remanded¶29

Rambilas Jaiswal v. Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal

Chhattisgarh HC9 Jan 2025CRR/40/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

maintenance enhancement; Section 127 CrPC; Section 125 CrPC; Family Court Ambikapur; cross revision petitions; consent order contention (counsel); salary Rs. 94,105/- per month; one-third salary plea; order dated 07.08.2024 set aside and remitted for fresh decision; dearness and medication grounds; appearance on 06.02.2025; CRR Chhattisgarh; Arvind Kumar Verma, J.; 2025:CGHC:3197 NAFR; common order

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 07.08.2024 set aside in both revision petitions; matter remitted to the concerned Family Court to decide afresh on its own merits after giving due opportunity of defence to either party; both parties directed to appear before the Family Court on 06.02.2025 with salary slip and relevant documents. ¶29

Rambilas Jaiswal Vs Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal — Maintenance and Alimony | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the Family Court, Ambikapur order dated 07.08.2024 (Mscl. Criminal Appeal No.219/2022) enhancing Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal's maintenance from Rs. 3,500/- to Rs. 5,000/- per month should be sustained or interfered with in the two cross revision petitions. +2 more

¶22

Court's answer

Ends of justice would be met by setting aside the impugned order dated 07.08.2024 in both the revision petitions and remitting the matter to the concerned Family Court to decide it afresh on its own merits, giving due opportunity of defence to either party.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

Operative direction: both parties shall remain present before the concerned Family Court on 06.02.2025 along with salary slip and all relevant documents which they wish to produce.

¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Common order of the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Arvind Kumar Verma, J., 10.01.2025; 2025:CGHC:3197 NAFR) on two cross revision petitions - CRR No. 1148 of 2024 by Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal/wife and CRR No. 40 of 2025 by Rambilas Jaiswal/husband - against the Family Court, Ambikapur order dated 07.08.2024 in Mscl. Criminal Appeal No.219/2022 allowing the wife's application under Section 127 CrPC and enhancing her maintenance from Rs. 3,500/- to Rs. 5,000/- per month (earlier gradations: Rs. 1000/- wife and Rs. 500 son, order dated 25.06.2004; Rs. 250/- and Rs. 358/-, order dated 28.07.2009, as printed; Rs. 3500/- and Rs. 3000, order dated 11.12.2018). Held: ends of justice would be met by setting aside the impugned order in both revisions and remitting the matter to the Family Court for decision afresh on merits with due opportunity of defence to either party; both parties directed to appear on 06.02.2025 with salary slip and documents. The husband's consent-order contention and the wife's plea for one-third of his Rs. 94,105/- p.m. salary were not adjudicated and stand remitted. No precedent cited or relied upon.

¶1

¶2

2025:CGHC:3197 NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

CRR No. 1148 of 2024

¶5

1 - Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal W/o Rambilas Jaiswal Aged About 51 Years R/o Malhotra Street, Near Gudri Market Ambikapur, District Sarguja, C.G.

¶6

--- Applicant(s)

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - Rambilas Jaiswal S/o Late Kanti Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 55 Years Police Station Patna Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Koriya, C.G.

¶9

--- Respondent(s)

¶10

CRR No. 40 of 2025

¶11

1 - Rambilas Jaiswal S/o Late Kanti Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 61 Years Occupation Service- Teacher Govt Primary School, Pasla, P.S.- Patna, Tehsil- Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.)

¶12

–--Applicant(s)

¶13

Versus

¶14

1 - Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal W/o Rambilas Jaiswal Aged About 53 Years R/o Malhotra Gali Near Gudri Bazaar, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.)

¶15

----Respondent

¶16

For Rambilas Jaiswal/husband : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal/wife : Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate

¶17

Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board

¶18

10/01/2025

¶19

1. Since subject matter in the both the revision petitions being common,

¶20

this Court proceeds to decide the matter by this common order.

¶21

¶22

2. This both revision petitions are preferred against the order dated 07.08.2024 passed in Mscl. Criminal Appeal No.219/2022 by the learned Family Court, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) whereby an application under Section 127 of CrPC fled by the Smt. Prabhavati i Jaiswal has been allowed.

¶23

3. Brief facts of the present case is that earlier Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal fled an application under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure i for grant of maintenance, the learned family Court vide order dated 25.06.2004 has allowed the application and granted maintenance amount to the tune of Rs. 1000/- per month for the wife and Rs. 500 per month for the minor son. Further an application was also f i led for enhancement of the maintenance amount and the maintenance towards the wife was enhanced to Rs. 250/- and towards son is enhanced to Rs. 358/- vide order dated 28.07.2009. Further, the maintenance was enhanced to Rs. 3500/- for the wife and Rs. 3000 to son vide order dated 11.12.2018. Again, she had fled an application seeking i enhancement of the quantum of maintenance under Section 127 of CrPC before the learned family Court on various grounds of dearness and medication etc and the prayer for enhancing the quantum of maintenance was that it should be enhanced from 3,500/- upto 30,000/per month. Vide order dated 07.08.2024, the family Court deciding the application on merits enhanced the quantum of maintenance from Rs. 3,500/- to Rs. 5000/- per month to Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal. Hence the present revision petitions.

¶24

4. Learned counsel for Rambilas Jaiswal/husband submits that he has never extended consent for enhancement of the quantum of

¶25

¶26

maintenance but his consent was to the extent that if the respondent will not prefer any appeal or revision against the order of maintenance then only the amount of 5000/- instead of 3,500/- may be enhanced as full and fnal amount, but immediately after the impugned order was i passed, she preferred the revision seeking enhancement of maintenance. It is trite and settled proposition of law that no appeal or revision is maintainable against the consent order; meaning thereby the consent order cannot be subjected to challenge except on the ground of fraud but in the instant matter the respondent has played both way, so she is not entitled for any kind of relief, even her order dated 07.08.2024 for enhancement to tune of Rs. 5,000/- may be set aside.

¶27

5. Learned counsel for Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal/wife submits that the family Court has failed to appreciate that the respondent is a public servant and is earning Rs. 94,105 per month and learned family Court ought to have granted one third of the salary towards maintenance amount. The applicant/wife has to maintain herself and her daughter and as the expenses towards the education of applicant’s daughter is likely to increase. Therefore, he prays for enhancement of the same.

¶28

6. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

¶29

7. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for parties, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the impugned order dated 07.08.2024 is set aside in both the revision petitions and the same is remitted back to the concerned Family Court for deciding it afresh on its own merits after giving due opportunity of defense to either party.

¶30

¶31

8. It is directed that both the parties shall remain present before the concerned family Court on 06.02.2025 along with salary slip and all the relevant documents which they wish to produce.

¶32

9. Of Ï ce is directed to send the records along with a certif i ed copy of this Order to the concerned Family Court for necessary information and compliance forthwi th.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

( Arvind Kumar Verma ) Judge

¶35

Jyoti

Rambilas Jaiswal v. Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambilas Jaiswal v. Smt. Prabhavati Jaiswal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lekhu Janghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raj Narayan Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ku. Belmati Seth Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Vs Smt. Tanu Kesharwani

Dr. Vipin Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Prateek Rao @ Babloo Vs State of Chhattisgarh