MANISH ARYA Vs. GEETA ARYA
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
Prafulla C. Pant, J. -
(1.) HEARD . This revision is directed against the judgment order dated 14.02.2012, passed by Additional Family Judge, Rishikesh, District Dehradun, in miscellaneous case no. 78 of 2010, whereby said court has directed the revisionist to pay interim maintenance @ Rs.2,000/ - per month to his minor daughter Yashika under section 125 Cr.P.C..
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the revisionist submitted that wife of the revisionist is doing teaching job, and earning for herself, and minor daughter Yashika lives with her. It is further pleaded that the revisionist has no means to pay maintenance as directed by the trial court. As far as the maintenance claimed by the wife is concerned, the trial court has already observed in the impugned order that since she is teaching in Om Sai Public School, Chiddarwala, as such she was not awarded any maintenance as she is able to maintain herself. However, the same cannot be said about the minor daughter. Even if minor daughter is living with her mother, the revisionist is not absolved from maintaining her (the minor daughter).
(3.) IT is further pointed out that during pendency of the case, only Rs.1,000/ - per month was directed to be paid as interim maintenance to the daughter, and Rs.2,000/ - per month in final order is excessive. However, this Court is unable to accept the contention of learned counsel for the revisionist for the reason that at the stage of interim maintenance complete evidence is not before the court to come to the definite conclusion as to the amount of maintenance. It is only after recording of the evidence, the trial court comes to the conclusion as to what exact amount of maintenance the person claiming is entitled. It is pleaded by the respondent before the trial court that revisionist is running a stationery shop in his village. He has means to pay the maintenance claimed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.