The High Court at Patna dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by a husband challenging an interim maintenance order of Rs. 3,000 per month granted to his wife by the Family Court, Katihar. The court held the amount was not excessive.
The maintenance application/petition was dismissed as having no merit.
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 Revision No.565 of 2016
======================================================
Shambhu Jha, Son of Ghuran Jha, Resident of Larkaniya Tola Gardpara, P. S. Katihar, District-Katihar.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
Opp. Party No. 3 to 5 are under natural guardian of their mother Bauby Rani Jha, Resident of Officer Colony, Ward No.7, P. S. Sahayak Katihar, District Katihar
.... .... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Shankar Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nand Kumar(App)
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER
3 06-02-2017 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.
2
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
ArunKumar/-
U
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the interim maintenance allowance of Rs. 3,000 per month granted by the Family Court is excessive or unjustifiable.
Whether the criminal revision petition filed by the husband under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act can be corrected as being filed under Section 125 CrPC.
Whether the impugned order in the maintenance case has merit.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shambhu Jha
The State of Bihar
Bauby Rani Jha
Bhavna Kumari
Raja Dksha
Sonakshi Kumar
Chakradhari Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
