This Criminal Revision challenged a Family Court maintenance order of Rs. 5,000. The Court found no reason to interfere as the amount was deemed appropriate despite cost of living escalation and dismissed the revision for non-prosecution.
The Criminal Revision Case was dismissed.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAYOF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTHREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICEE.V.VENUGOPAL
Criminal Revision Gase No.1277 ol2012
Criminal Revision filed underSections 397 & 401 Cr'P.C.aggrieved by the order dated 08.05.2012passed in M.c.No.35 of 2011 on the file of the Court of the Judge, FamilyCourt, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad.
Between:
Saayani Venkata Sesh ArunKumar, S/o. late Sayani Kamalakar Rao, aged aboutgg years, Occ PrivateJob, R/o.2-11119, Adarsh Nagar,Meerpet, HYderabad'
...Petitioner.
AND
... ResPondents.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2012 CRLRCMP.NO: 1995oF 20121
Petition under Section482 Cr.P.C. prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filedin support of the petition,the High Courtmay be pleased to stay of all furtherproceedings in pursuanceof order passedin trrtc.tto.ss ot 2011 dated08.o5.2012 by Family court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.
Counset for the Petitioner:Sri P.Ravi Kiran.
Counsel for the RespondentNo.1: Sri ChetluruSreenivas. Counsel for the RespondentNo.2: The Public Prosecutor.
The Court made the following:ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENIIGOPAL CRIMINA L REVISION CASE,No.l277 oF 2tot2
ORDE R:
This Criminal Revision Case is filed seeking to s,:t aside the order dated 08.05.2012 in M.C.No.3S of 2O1l on the file of learned Judge Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar (for short, 'the appellate Court")
' 11996;a S,,p.",r,"6urr Cases 720
'i,,1
z
3
Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stald closed.
SD/- B.SATYAVATHI DEPUTY REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
.)D
SEciIoN oFFICER
To,
JCK
BSR
I
i l
HIGH COURT
DATED: 0410812023
ORDER
,-$
i
h+
)
<br>._)
CRLRG.No.1277 ot 2012
DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL REVISION CAIJE.
A--
$A
t_-) ?
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere in a maintenance order which was considered meagre and not appropriate for escalation of cost of living.
Whether the lack of compliance with an interim order justifies interfering with the final maintenance order.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bani Singh and others Vs State of UttarakhandReferred¶23
Bani Singh and others Vs State of Uttarakhand
Saayani Venkata Sesh Arun Kumar
Smt. Gunthi Revathi
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor
E.V. Venugopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
