Manoj Kumar v. Anuradha Kamlesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1938 of 2017 ====================================================== Manoj Kumar Son of Sri Om Prakash Tanti, Resident of Mohalla- Bari Ashiqpur, Jamalpur, P.S.- East Colony, District- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Anuradha Kamlesh D/o Late Mr. Kamleshwar Prasad, Resident of Gauri Sadan, Janta More Mohanpur Near Rly No.2, School Keshopur, P.S.- Jamalpur, District- Munger.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 22-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 31.07.2017 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger in Matrimonial Case No. 257 of 2015, whereby and whereunder the petitioner was directed to pay lump sum of Rs.10,000/- as one time litigation cost and Rs.1,000/- on each date to the respondent from the date of order till the disposal of the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Locomotive Pilot and he has been getting meager sum after deduction but this fact has not been considered by the learned Family Court.
4. Without going into further submission made on
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1938 of 2017 dt.22-07-2025 2/2 behalf of the petitioner, I am of the view that the order directing the petitioner to pay lump sum of Rs.10,000/- as one time litigation amount and Rs.1,000/- on each date to the respondent from the date of order till the disposal of the case cannot be said to be excessive and further when it is admitted that the petitioner being a Locomotive Pilot in Railway has been getting salary of Rs.44,000/- per month before deduction, this fact becomes much apparent.
5. In the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 31.07.2017 and the same is affirmed. Accordingly, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- AFR/NAFR AFR/NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 23.07.2025 Transmission Date NA