The Court modified impugned orders regarding maintenance arrears deduction from salary. Account of payments already made was considered, reducing the arrears to Rs.35,000/-, to be paid in two installments via salary deductions.
Petitioner directed to pay Rs.35,000/- to respondents via Commandant in two equal installments.
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.
Crl. Rev. P. No.13/2017
B E F O R E THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
Present :
For the petitioner : Mr. D.C. Roy, Advocate. Mr. D. Sarkar, Advocate. For the respondent No.3 : Mr. T.D. Majumder, Advocate.
25.07.2017.
Heard Mr. D. Sarkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T.D. Majumder, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3.
No representation from the private respondents despite proper service of notice upon them.
This revision is directed against the order dated 12.01.2017 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala in Misc.(Ex) No.24 of 2016 and the consequential order dated 22.03.2017 issued by the Commandant, 10th Bn. TSR (IR-V) (respondent 3) ordering deduction of Rs.1,25,000/- from the salary of the petitioner in 4 (four) equal installments w.e.f. 01.04.2017. This order is in addition to the order for deduction of Rs.5,000/- from his monthly salary for the maintenance of respondent Nos.1 and 2.
It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there has been miscalculation made by the trial Court/Execution Court with respect to the actual amount of maintenance arrears due from the petitioner, which was wrongly calculated at Rs.1.25 lakhs. According to the learned counsel, the trial Court did not take into consideration the monthly maintenance already paid by him from 01.11.2014 to 12.01.2017 and also did not take into account Rs.20,000/- already paid by him as per the directions of this Court contained in the order dated 10.04.2017 passed in connection with Crl. Rev. P. No.13 of 2017. He, therefore, submits that deductions of these amounts may be made so that he should thereafter be allowed to pay the due amount i.e. Rs.35,000/- in two equal installments.
On going through the materials on record, I find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. After
Crl. Rev. P. No.13/2017
Page 1 of 2
deducting all the payments made by the petitioner heretofore the amount actually payable by him to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 as arrears of maintenance allowance stands reduced to Rs.35,000/-.
Under the circumstances, this criminal revision petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to pay Rs.35,000/- to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 through the Commandant i.e. respondent No.3, who shall make necessary deductions from the monthly salary of the petitioner in two equal installments, which shall be in addition to the monthly maintenance allowance due to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 every month.
Both the impugned orders stands modified in the manner and to the extent indicated above.
A copy of this order shall be supplied to the learned counsel for the respondent No.3.
CHIEF JUSTICE
Crl. Rev. P. No.13/2017
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether there was miscalculation of maintenance arrears by the trial court and Execution Court.
Petitioner
Respondent No.1
Respondent No.2
Respondent No.3
Chief Justice
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
