Revision against a Family Court order directing the petitioner to pay monthly maintenance to his father, who was held to have no means to maintain himself. The High Court found no illegality in the impugned order and dismissed the revision.
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.677 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District-
======================================================
Sunil Kumar Kashyap @ Sunil Kumar, Son of Nand Kishore Singh, resident of Village- Rohuwa Khas, Police Station- Kotwa, District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar No.-7 For the Respondent/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER
April, 2017, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Motihari, East Champaran in Maintenance Case No. 205 of 2016, directing him to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month to the Opposite Party No. 2.
was passed against the father of the petitioner, holding, inter alia , that he has no means to maintain himself.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.677 of 2017(5) dt.12-02-2024 2/2
any illegality in the same.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
skm/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Was the Family Court order directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 3,000 per month maintenance to his father sustainable in law?
Sunil Kumar Kashyap @ Sunil Kumar
The State of Bihar
Nand Kishore Singh
Sanjay Singh
Bibek Chaudhuri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
