Satya Kumar Pandey v. Smt. Shweta Pandey

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No. 732 of 2015 Satya Kumar Pandey, aged about 39 years, son of Shri Dharmraj Pandey, Occupation Service, R/o MIG-1/4, Kharun Green, Kumhari, Bhilai, District Durg, office of Jaiswal Nico Industries Limited, Steel Plant Division, Siltara Groth Centre, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.).

---- Applicant

Versus

Smt. Shweta Pandey, aged about 35 years, Wife of Satya Kumar Pandey, Occupation House Wife, R/o Kabir Nagar, MIG88, Phase-2, Raipur, Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant :

Shri T.K. Tiwari, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 07/09/2015 (1) Heard on admission.

(2) In a proceeding for maintenance initiated under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Cr.P.C.') by nonapplicant/wife Smt. Shweta Pandey, the Family Court, Raipur, by its order dated 13.08.2015, passed in Case No.705/2014, granted Rs. 6000/- as monthly interim maintenance amount in favour of the nonapplicant; further recorded a finding that the relationship of husband and wife is admitted and non-applicant is unable to maintain herself which is sought to be challenged by the applicant/husband stating that the same is on higher side.

(3) Shri T.K. Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that in a proceeding under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, Rs.10,000/- has already been granted as litigation expenses, therefore, order grating maintenance deserves to be setaside. (4) After hearing learned counsel appearing for the applicant, taking into consideration the cost of living & price-index and basic needs of the non-applicant, an amount of Rs.6,000/- as monthly interim maintenance granted to the non-applicant cannot be said to be shockingly high warranting interference by this Court in its revisional jurisdiction as no such interim maintenance has been granted by the Family Court in proceeding under Section 24 of the Act, only litigation and conveyance allowance has been granted.

(5) Thus, the revision deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed at admission stage. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of maintenance proceeding and to conclude the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (6) Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-