Vijay Paswan v. Rupa Devi @ Tajmani Devi And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.226 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- ====================================================== Vijay Paswan Son Of Sadanand Paswan Resident Of Village - Madhubani Lailo Khar, Ward No. 11, P.O. - Pahunsi, P.S. - Kuari (Kursakanta), District - Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Rupa Devi @ Tajmani Devi Wife Of Vijay Paswan D/O - Ram Prasad Paswan, Resident Of Village - Baghua, Ward No. - 13, P.S. - Jogbani, District - Araria.

2.

Alok Kumar Paswan Son Of Vijay Paswan Represented Through Natural Guardian By The Opposite Party No.1, Who Is The Mother, Resident Of Village - Baghua, Ward No. - 13, P.S. - Jogbani, District - Araria. 3.

Bharti Kumari Daughter Of Vijay Paswan Represented Through Natural Guardian By The Opposite Party No.1, Who Is The Mother, Resident Of Village - Baghua, Ward No. - 13, P.S. - Jogbani, District - Araria. 4.

Golu Kumar Son Of Vijay Paswan Represented Through Natural Guardian By The Opposite Party No.1, Who Is The Mother, Resident Of Village - Baghua, Ward No. - 13, P.S. - Jogbani, District - Araria. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nishant Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 30-04-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by order dated 24.01.2024, the matter was referred to mediation as both the parties agreed for mediation.

3. Despite the order of this Court, neither the petitioner nor the opposite party appeared for mediation.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no instruction in the matter.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.226 of 2019(5) dt.30-04-2024 2/2

5. I have gone through the records of the case.

6. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Araria has fixed a sum of Rs. 6,000/- as maintenance to be paid by the petitioner for his wife and three children.

7. In my opinion, the maintenance amount is very less but since the other side has not approached this court, this Court is not passing any order for enhancement of maintenance.

8. Rs. 6,000/- for four persons comes to 1,500/- per person. This kind of maintenance amount should not have been fixed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Araria.

9. This application is dismissed with liberty to the opposite party to move before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Araria for enhancement of the maintenance amount.

10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this application is dismissed.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U