GANGA DEVI BHATT Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANOTHER
LAWS(UTN)-2012-3-141
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on March 23,2012

Ganga Devi Bhatt Appellant
VERSUS
State of Uttaranchal and another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Revisionist Ganga Devi Bhatt has preferred this revision against the amount of maintenance, which was granted to her by Special Judicial Magistrate, Almora on dated 29.05.2004 payable by her husband Nityanand Bhatt. The said judgment was delivered by the Magistrate while disposing of Criminal Misc. Application No. 78 of 2003 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Nityanand Bhatt was a Government Servant and admittedly, his basic pay was Rs. 2780/- per month without D.A. and other allowances, if any. So revisionist assailed this order with an intention that the amount granted by the Magistrate was so meagre and it would have been granted by taking into consideration the gross salary of Nityanand Bhatt, which could have been well assessed by the Magistrate considering the basic pay of her husband as Rs. 2780/- per month. Nityanand Bhatt did not file any paper showing his gross salary on the record but it could have been well determined by the court below taking his basic pay into consideration.
(2.) On the other hand, it has been argued by learned counsel for Nityanand Bhatt that Ganga Devi Bhatt, of late moved an application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. for 2 enhancement of the maintenance and it has been allowed by the learned Magistrate. This argument has been refuted by learned counsel for the revisionist with the contention that since Nityanand Bhatt is a Government Servant and after implementation of Sixth Pay Commission s report, his salary has been enhanced a lot. So in the changed circumstances, the amount might have been enhanced by the Magistrate. Although at the same time, learned counsel for the revisionist argued that neither any application filed for enhancement of maintenance amount is in his knowledge nor has been brought on record by learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.
(3.) Even if her contention for enhancement of the maintenance amount is not accepted, then also her claim for enhancement of Rs. 400/- since 29.05.2004 to the date when learned Magistrate in exercise of powers under Section 127 Cr.P.C. has enhanced the amount, exists. This argument is acceptable and the Court feels that Nityanand Bhatt, who was getting Rs. 2780/- per month, as basic pay, would have been getting at least Rs. 4500/- per month as gross salary which he concealed before the court below. Considering this much amount, as gross salary per month payable to Nityanand Bhatt, the Court feels that amount should not have been less than Rs. 1000/- per month payable to revisionist since 29.05.2004. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. The amount of maintenance, as awarded by learned Magistrate, is enhanced from Rs. 400/- to Rs. 1,000/- per month since 29.05.2004. This amount of Rs. 1,000/- will be payable till date when the amount has been enhanced by learned Magistrate under Section 127 Cr.P.C., if any.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.