High Court disposed of criminal revision maintaining order directing petitioner to honor compromise settlement of Rs. 3.20 Lac with wife.
Petitioner directed to pay Rs. 3.20 Lac to opposite party as per compromise; otherwise liable to pay Rs. 5000/month.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Revision No. 338 of 2016
Guddu Choudhary @ Govind Choudhary S/O Tibhu Choudhary @ Jhalo Choudhary; R/O Village-Aseya, P.O.-Ranka Bouliya, P.S. + District – Garhwa … Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Manti Devi D/O Bhageshwar Chaudhary; R/O Village Garhota, P.O.- Danda, P.S. + District Garhwa … Opposite Parties
-------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
-------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Avishek Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Amrita Kumari, A.P.P For the O.P No. 2 : Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate -------
12/14.02.2020
The petitioner has challenged the order dated 01.03.2016 passed in E.P.P No. 06 of 2014 which was filed in Misc. Case No. 35 of 2011. By this order the petitioner has been directed to pay Rs. 5000/- per month from the date of the petition to his wife.
2 . Vide, I.A No. 2235 of 2018 parties have filed a compromise petition. This interlocutory application has been supported by affidavit of both the parties.
3 . In this application it is stated that the parties have settled their dispute among themselves and the petitioner has agreed to pay Rs.3.20 Lac to his wife as full and final settlement. There are certain terms indicated in this application.
4 . Mr. Navin Kumar, the learned counsel for O.P No. 2 has raised an apprehension about intention of the petitioner as only Rs. 20,000/- has been paid by him to O.P No. 2 till date.
5 . Mr. Nilesh Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, referring to the supplementary affidavit dated 20.11.2019 submits that the petitioner has already prepared a demand draft for Rs. 2 Lacs in favour of O.P No. 2, a copy of which has been annexed vide Annexure-A to the
2
supplementary affidavit and the balance amount shall be paid within the stipulated time.
6 . In view of the aforesaid facts, this criminal revision petition stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioner, who has filed a compromise petition, to comply with and honour the compromise between the parties, the terms of which are recorded in I.A No. 2235 of 2018, failing which he shall be liable to pay Rs. 5000/- per month to O.P No. 2, as ordered by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Garhwa.
7 . I.A No. 2691 of 2016 is disposed of. I.A No. 2235 of 2018 stands allowed.
8 . Let the lower court records be sent to the court concerned forthwith.
(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)
Amit/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to uphold the compromise petition seeking reduction of interim maintenance and granting final settlement amount.
Whether the petitioner complied with the conditions of the compromise regarding payment of settlement amount.
Guddu Choudhary @ Govind Choudhary
The State of Jharkhand
Manti Devi
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
