LAWS(GAU)-2011-12-15

ABHOY CHANDRA KAKATI Vs. INDIRA KAKATI

Decided On December 15, 2011
ABHOY CHANDRA KAKATI Appellant
V/S
INDIRA KAKATI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent wife filed a petition under Section 125 CrPC in the Court of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kamrup, at Guwahati ("Family Court" hereinafter) seeking maintenance for herself and her three children. THE respondent stated that she was married to the petitioner in the year 1985 and out of the wedlock three children were born. However, since the year 2003, the petitioner used to stay away from the house and refused to maintain them. From 2006, the petitioner stated to live seperately and from October, 2008, he totally stopped payment of any amount to the family. It is under such circumstances that the respondent filed the aforesaid petition seeking maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month. THE said proceeding was registered as FC Case No. (Crl.) 534/2008.

(2.) THE petitioner who was arrayed as the opposite party contested the proceeding by filing written statement. Though he admitted the marriage with the respondent and the birth of the three children, he denied the other allegation. In his written statement, he stated that he is an employee of the Food Corporation of India (hereafter referred to as "FCI") and was posted at Diphu, Karbi Anglong, during the period 2003-2005 for which he could not devote sufficient time to his family. He stated that the respondent earned rental income and that he paid all the educational expenses of the children. He further stated that he had taken a bank loan for construction of his house and has to pay a substantial amount every month towrds the repayment of the loan.

(3.) MR. Saikia submits that though initially he received notice and submitted written statement but subsequently he did not receive any further notice the Family Court for which he could not adduce evidence. He submits that the petitioner is working in the FCI, Diphu Branch in clerical grade and out of his salary he has to make provision for repayment of the loan amount which he had taken for construction of the house at Guwahati. He further submits that the respondent and the children are staying in the same house which he had constructed wherein he also stays when he visits Guwahati. He submits that the quantum fixed by the Family Court is excessive and requires consideration by this Court.