Petitioner challenged orders affirming maintenance enhancements. Court held that enhancement in revision implies liability from the date of the trial court order, finding no error in lower courts' decisions. Petition dismissed.
Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissing petitioner's challenge to maintenance enhancement orders.
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.
CRM No.M-10359 of 2017
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-10359 of 2017 Date of decision: 28.03.2017
Raj Singh
….Petitioner
Versus
Amita and another
….Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL
Present: Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
REKHA MITTAL J. (Oral)
By invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') the petitioner directs challenge against orders dated 31.08.2016 (Annexure P3) passed by the Executing Court and dated 07.03.2017 (Annexure P4) by the Revisional Court affirming the order dated 31.08.2016 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panipat.
Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for claiming maintenance and the same was allowed on 13.11.2004 and maintenance @ Rs.2,000/- per month was awarded. Later, they filed an application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. for enhancement of maintenance and the same was allowed vide order dated 07.11.2011 and the maintenance was enhanced to Rs.3,000/- per month. The respondents filed a revision petition before the Court of Sessions and the maintenance was enhanced to Rs.5,000/- each per month vide order dated 01.05.2015
Mohd. Yakub 2017.03.29 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
CRM No.M-10359 of 2017
2
(Annexure P2). The respondents filed an application for execution of the order of maintenance claiming maintenance at the enhanced rate of Rs.5,000/- each per month w.e.f. 07.11.2011. It is vehemently argued that as the order (Annexure P2) passed by the Court in revision allowing enhancement of maintenance does not say that the enhanced maintenance shall be available to the respondents with effect from the date of order passed by the trial Court in proceedings under Section 127 Cr.P.C., the respondents, at best, can claim enhanced maintenance @ Rs.5,000/- per month each w.e.f. 11.05.2015.
I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the paperbook particularly the various annexures appended with the petition.
Undenyingly, the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. seeking enhancement of maintenance was filed by the wife and minor daughter of the petitioner on 09.03.2010 and the same was decided by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panipat on 07.11.2011 and the petitioner (respondent therein) was directed to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month instead of Rs.2,000/- from the date of order. As has been noticed hereinbefore, the Revisional Court enhanced the maintenance @ Rs.5,000/- per month to each of the respondents. The very fact that the Court has allowed enhancement of maintenance while modifying the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panipat would imply that the enhanced maintenance would be payable from the date of order passed by the Judicial Magistrate. That being so, I do not find any error much less illegality in the orders passed by the Courts below warranting intervention.
Mohd. Yakub 2017.03.29 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
CRM No.M-10359 of 2017
3
Dismissed.
28.03.2017 (REKHA MITTAL) yakub JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
Mohd. Yakub 2017.03.29 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the enhancement in maintenance allowed in revision proceedings is payable retroactively from the date of the lower court order or only from the date of the revision order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raj Singh
Amita
Rekha Mittal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
