Thavaselvan, Age 46 Years, v. S. Punithakumari,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30.01.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Crl.R.C.No.1006 of 2016 Thavaselvan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.S.Punithakumari 2.Minor T.Thavanitha minor represented by her mother 1st respondent.
... Respondents Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. against the order of learned Judge, Family Court, Erode, passed in M.C.No.17 of 2015 on 01.04.2016.
For Petitioner :
Mr.M.Guruprasad For Respondents:
Mr.J.Titus Enock *****
O R D E R
This revision arises against an order directing payment of maintenance. After passing interim orders, matter has been referred to mediation without success.
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned counsel for respondents.
3. This petition challenges the order of learned Judge, Family Court, Erode, passed in M.C.No.17 of 2015 on 01.04.2016 u/s. 125 Cr.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that in proceedings in C.M.P.No.10616 of 2013, payment of a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the 1st respondent/wife and Rs.4,000/- to the 2nd respondent/minor child towards maintenance was directed. The Court below in directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- in maintenance to the minor daughter/2nd respondent has observed that an earlier direction towards maintenance in other proceedings would not be a bar to raise a claim u/s. 125 Cr.P.C. but erroneously failed to factor in the effect of such other order, in directing further payment of maintenance. Learned counsel submitted that under the two orders, the petitioner, in effect, was required to pay maintenance in a sum of Rs.14,000/- which petitioner is unable to do. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
5. It is the contention of learned counsel that Court below has directed payment of maintenance only to the minor daughter since the first respondent/wife was employed as a nurse. On the same consideration Court below, ought to have taken note of the fact that 1st respondent/wife has admitted to earning Rs.8,000/- per month and directed payment of maintenance to the daughter in a lesser sum. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has to take care of his mother aged 76 years.
6. Learned counsel for respondents submitted that towards enabling respondents to receive maintenance under one order, and having had return of all her articles, first respondent has withdrawn the proceedings in C.M.P.No.10616 of 2013. Learned counsel for respondents acknowledges that in keeping with the earlier direction of this Court the petitioner has effected payment of Rs.1,00,000/- to the respondents.
7. On consideration this Court, considers it appropriate and accordingly directs the petitioner to effect payment of maintenance in a sums of Rs.4,000/- to the 1st respondent/wife and Rs.8,000/- to the 2nd respondent/daughter. Such sum shall be payable from the date of filing of original petition before Court below viz 21.04.2015, after giving due deduction to the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- paid during the pendency of proceedings before this Court. The petitioner shall now be required to effect payment of the arrears due within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petitioner shall be upon duty to make payment of maintenance which is now ordered on or before 5th of every succeeding month. Criminal revision petition is ordered accordingly. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To The Judge, Family Court, Erode +1 cc to Mr.M.Guruprasad Advocate sr 5750 +1 cc to Mr.J.Titus Enock Advocate sr 5420 Crl.R.C.No.1006 of 2016 vd(co) aa10/03/2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/