Petitions invoking inherent powers under Cr.P.C. to quash or enhance maintenance were dismissed as withdrawn. Parties instructed to contend in Criminal Meadowtrials pending inquiry and execution application due to pending proceedings.
Petitions dismissed as withdrawn; trial court record returned.
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.
Signature Not Verified Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:07.10.2024 15:21 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file an d no page is missing.
w
his relatives invoking Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeking.various reliefs. The parties are concededly married to each other and have a child bom out of the said wedlock, the child presentlybeing in the care and custody of the petitionerMukta Mani (the wife).
On the application of the wife in the aforesaid proceedings, after securingreply and insistingon disclosures,the MetropolitanMagistrate,by order dated 10.12.2014 had granted interim maintenance allowance of Rs. 20,000/- per month - composite for the wife and child - from the date of filing of the petition- directingDinesh Kathuria (the husband) to pay the same.
Both the parties were aggrieved by the said order. They took the matter to the appellate court by criminal appeal nos. 68/2/15 and 97/2/15, which were dismissed by order dated 23.02.2016. It is noted that in absence of any concreteproof to show income higher than the one assumed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, the court of sessions in appeal was not inclined to grant any enhanced maintenance allowance to the wife or the child. On the other hand, the husbandhaving failed to comply with the interimdirections to pay the arrears, his appeal was dismissed.
Aggrievedby the said result of both the appeals,both the partiescame up to this court by the present petitions invoking the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
After some hearing, the learned counsel on both sides submitted that they are under instructionsto withdraw the present petitions, the parties reservingtheir respectiverightto agitatetheir contentionsat the stage of CRLM C. J353/2016 page 2 of3
rf
final adjudication on the claim of the wife and the child for maintenance allowance to be fixed by leading evidenceduring the inquirywhich is already underway.
The grievanceof the wife that the husband has not been making the payment in terms of interim order diligentlyand scrupulouslyis noted for record. It has also however,been statedthat executionapplicationis already before the MetropolitanMagistrate pending considerationand necessary orders. The husband, through counsel, however, to show his bona fide, undertakes that he shall pay the requisite amount including the arrears arisingout of suchorderwithoutprejudiceto his contentionsand defences.
Binding the husband with the undertaking to abide by the order, though without prejudice to his contentionsand subject to adjustment,if required, both the petitions are dismissed as withdrawn.
The trial court record will be returned forthwith.
SEPTEMBER 19, 2018
nk
CRL.M.C. 1353/2016
page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to admit appeals requesting enhancement of interim maintenance and modification of maintenance arrears directions.
Whether to proceed with present petitions for adjudication given withdrawal instructions and pending execution application.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukta Mani
RAM DATT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
