Petitioner challenged the family court's order fixing ad-interim maintenance of Rs. 2000/month for his wife, arguing late filing and vexatious motive. Court held the order was well-reasoned and trivial amount allowed, dismissing the petition.
Maintenance petition dismissed; liberty to file fresh petition on change of circumstances.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.39133 of 2014
====================================================== Damodar Rai son of Late Ram Dahin Rai Resident of village - Tehal Tola, P.S. Garkha, District - Saran at Chapra
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, Adv. Mr. Anant Kumar Bhashkar, Adv. For the Opposite Party No.1: Mr. Anil Singh (App) For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER
3 15-09-2017 Heard Shri Anant Kumar Bhashkar, assisted by Rajesh Kr. Singh and the learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2.
The petitioner has assailed the order dated 11.07.2014 passed in Maintenance Case No. 128 of 2013 whereby and whereunder the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Saran at Chapra has fixed an ad-interim maintenance of Rs. 2000/- per month.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present maintenance petition has been filed after 47 years of marriage as well as the same is vexatious and mala fide and there are no reasons for filing the said petition.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39133 of 2014 (3) dt.15-09-2017
2/2
I have perused the order of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Saran at Chapra and I find that admittedly the petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 are the husband and wife and, therefore, the obligation of the petitioner is to maintain his wife in good condition and respect. I find from the order that the said order dated 11.07.2014 is well reasoned and a trivial amount of Rs. 2000/- per month has been allowed as maintenance.
Accordingly, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The petition is dismissed.
However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a petition before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Saran at Chapra in case of change of circumstances.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
BTiwary/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the family court's order fixing ad-interim maintenance of Rs. 2000 per month.
Whether the maintenance petition filed after 47 years of marriage is vexatious and mala fide.
Damodar Rai
Kismatiya Devi
The State of Bihar
Mohit Kumar Shah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
