Partly allowed

Kartik Tak v. Smt. Ankita Tak

Rajasthan HC1 May 2019CRLMA/49/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application to recall a prior maintenance order, the High Court modified the maintenance amounts payable by the petitioner, a government servant. Based on an AAG report stating emoluments of Rs. 20,800, the Court reduced wife's maintenance to Rs. 5,000 and son's to Rs. 2,000.

What did the court decide?

Maintenance to wife modified to Rs. 5,000 per month; maintenance to son modified to Rs. 2,000 per month; original order recalled.

Kartik Tak Vs Smt. Ankita Tak — Maintenance and Alimony | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Appli No. 49/2019

¶3

Kartik Tak S/o Shri Chain Singh Tak, Aged About 32 Years, B/c Mali, R/o Pahariya Bera, Magra Punjla Mandore, Jodhpur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Smt. Ankita Tak W/o Shri Kartik Tak, D/o Shri Yogendra Singh Kachchhwah, Resident Of Plot No. 57, Thakur Virendra Singh Nagar, Mandore Road, Jodhpur.

¶7

Jignesh Tak S/o Shri Kartik Tak, Aged About 10 Years, Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Ankita Tak W/o Shri Kartik Tak, D/o Shri Yogendra Singh Kachchhwah, Resident Of Plot No. 57, Thakur Virendra Singh Nagar, Mandore Road, Jodhpur.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Girish Sankhala. For Respondent(s) : Ms.Deepika Vyas. Ms.Rekha Borana, AAG.

¶10

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶11

Order

¶12

01/05/2019

¶13

The petitioner has preferred the present criminal

¶14

application claiming the following relief :-

¶15

“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that the criminal misc. application for recalling the order impugned may kindly be allowed and the order passed in said criminal misc. petition be recalled.”

¶16

S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2282/2016 was allowed by this Court by order dated 29.10.2018 after perusing the record. This Court directed to enhance the maintenance to be Rs.10,000/per month for the wife and Rs.5,000/- per month for the son. The

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLMA-49/2019]

¶19

petitioner despite service did not choose to represent himself in that misc. petition. However, in the interest of justice, the present application is heard.

¶20

The petitioner is a government servant and learned AAG Ms.Rekha Borana was directed to find the basic emoluments received by the petitioner.

¶21

Learned AAG has filed a report on 4.4.2019 whereby, she has submitted that the petitioner will be getting Rs.20,800/as pay and emoluments.

¶22

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the report submitted by the learned AAG, this Court is of the opinion that the order dated 29.10.2018 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2282/2016 deserves to be modified.

¶23

Accordingly, the instant application is allowed and the order dated 29.10.2018 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2282/2016 is modified and now the petitioner shall pay maintenance to the tune of Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.2,000/- per month to the son.

¶24

The State of Rajasthan is not a party but since is being represented by the learned AAG Ms.Rekha Borana, it is directed that the salary shall be disbursed to the petitioner after ensuring the payment of maintenance amount to the wife and son in accordance with the prevailing order.

¶25

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI)J.

¶26

29-SPhophaliya/-

Kartik Tak v. Smt. Ankita Tak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kartik Tak v. Smt. Ankita Tak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Rajasthan Vs Mansingh

State of Rajasthan Vs Indus Tower Ltd.

Hdb Financial Services Ltd. Vs District Magistrate, Bhilwara

Hemantkanta Sharma Vs Central Bank of India

Tikamchand and Anr. Vs the Civil Judgej.D. Merta and Ors.

M/S. C.D. Distributers Vs State of Rajasthan