Smt.Prema Bai v. Kunturam
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
.\ ahegkaamwgama 2% m THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C'.G-l $ingla gaqglh Criminal Revision No3 )5 12005 PETITIONER Smt. Prema Bai, aged about 36 years Applicant W/o.
Kuntu Ram Chandrakar, R/o. Through : Chandan Chandrakar Go\7ernment Higher Secondary School Karanj, Bhilai Chowki, Jewra Sirsa Tahsil and District Durg (CAG)
VERSUS
s R E S P O N D E N T :
Kunturam, S/o. Prabhuram Chandrakar No§n-applicants Aged about 43 years R/o.
Purana Bazar Dallirajhara P.S.
Dallirajhara, Tahsil Balod District Durg (C.G.) CRIMINAL REVISION UNDER SECTION {fIOF THE FAMILY COURT$ ACT.
W"
I I E BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER DATED 02.06.2005 I I PASSED BY THE JUDGE FAMILY COURT , DURG'T 'o.G.
IN CRIIIIII-NAL APPEAL No. 1015/2005Ma T"
"hue".
WW 069$ NO BIS @ém mm (W) '
WW @m émqmm WWW S B Hon'ble Justice Mr Sa [a1 K. Agrawa!
03-07-2014 Shn D.N. Prajapatl, co nsel forthe petitiOner.
Heard an admission;
&'T (1) Learned counsel app aring fur the petitioner, while attacking the impugned order rejectin the appiication for maintenance, would §ubmit thet the order im ugned rejecting the appiication for maintenance passed by th Family Court is bad in law, which:
deserves to be set aside.
(2) Upon due appreciatlo of evidence available on record, the Family Court, by its order dated 02'062005 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1015/2005, r corded findings that marriage of the applicant was solemnized th respondent - Kunturam in the year i 1982 and, thereafter, there was Chhod Chhutti between them; and after 12 years of the marria e, petitioner/wife tiled an application for maintenance; apart from de ay in filing the application, Family Court recorded a finding that the etitioner is living adulterous life as she is residing with one Tarachan Satnami, which is duly proved during the course of trial and, thus, th re is no sufficient cause for the petitioner
, "XI-HC WWW Qo/Q 9/5 /wa§ m mm (HEW) WWW ammamia?
mmw'am WW WW ~ $afcmm to live separately from the respondent and rejected app!ication for maintenancetiled by the petitioner.
(3) Considering the facté'that after iong years of marriage (yetitioner fried an application for maintenance and apart from the delay in tiling the application, looking to the finding recorded by Family Coun that the petitioner is living adulterous iife with one Tarachand Satnami, which is duly proved during the course of trial, l;
n the order impugned rejecting the do not find any illegality application for maintenance tiled by the petitioner. The revision is dismissed at the admission silage without notice to the other sid/eJyz 4wsaniay Sal KiAgYi'W'
"
wage