•w" s- HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR SinaieBench : Hon'ble^ShriDiiiDRaosahebDeshmukh.J. Criminal Revision No.266 of 2006 Petitioner Non-Applicants Dinesh Kumar Patel, S/o Johan Lal Patel, aged about 27 yeais, R/o LW.N. 162, Vaishali Nagar, Distt. Durg(C.G.) versys Smt.JStttara Patet, aged 25 years, W/o Dins^h Patel 2. Digeshwari @ Megha Patei, D/o Dinesh Patel, aged 1 year, No.2 Minor though her mother Smt. Uttara Patel, Both R<o Saragaon, P.S. Kharora, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Criminal Revision underSeclion 19(41 ofthe Familv Courts Act Present: Shri D.N.PrajaRati, counsel for the applicant. Shri Y.C.Sharma, counsel for the non-applicants. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 24th day ofMarch, 2009) Heard on admission. (2) Petitioner isaggrieved bythe order dated 16-2-2006 passed by the ISnd Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur avrarding maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month cumuiativeiyto the non-applteants, i.e., Rs.700/- for non-applicant No.l/w'rfe and Rs.300/- for non-applteant No.2/minor .daughter. (3) A perusal of the impugned order shows that the petitioner had cleariy stated before the Family Court that he was not willing to !et the non-applicants stay with him and had agreed to pay malntenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month. Non-applicant No.l/wife had also agreed to receive the said maintenance. TTie impugned order is founded on the compromise votuntarily arrived at between the parties before the Famiiy Court. (4) No such illegatity as would justify any Tnterference in exercise of revisionai jurisdiction is seen in the impugned order. The revision being deyojd of any merit is dismissed at the stage of admj; ." Sd-' ' Judge . ';t