IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.542 of 2008 KAMLESH SAH Versus REENA DEVI ----------- 3 20.8.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the opposite party. Reliance may be made to the earlier order of this Court dated 26.6.2008. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner and the opposite party have appeared in person and in presence of their Counsel, they have conveyed their unanimous and voluntary decision to patch up their all disputes and differences with a resolute determination to live with each other as man and wife. This Court in fact would commend such attitude of the petitioner and opposite party especially when it is found from their version that while the daughter out of the marriage is living with the petitioner, the husband and the son out of the same marriage is living with the wife, the opposite party. In that view of the matter, if both the parties have decided to reunite themselves, there is every hope that a broken home would remerge bringing all four under one common roof. With the past experience of either party being bitter on account of any difference and dispute, now when both of them have decided to live together and lead a harmonious life for themselves and for their children, it is not expected that now either party will give rise to any situation which will precipitate into another dispute and yet another separation. The petitioner, husband however being the head of the family will have to adopt a for more responsible 2 attitude and has also given an undertaking to this Court that henceforth he will not misbehave or cause any physical or mental torture to his wife. The wife responding to the aforesaid solemn promise of her husband has also reciprocated the same by giving a word of her good and exemplary behaviour towards her husband petitioner. In such a situation, the order of the Court below directing payment of maintenance will not be required to be paid from the month of September, 2008. It is however, made clear that in case the opposite party is driven out of the house or is again made uncomfortable during her stay in the house of the petitioner which may force her to leave the house of the petitioner, would also lead to automatic revival of order of maintenance in her favour and the petitioner will become liable to pay not only the current amount of maintenance but also the arrear to be calculated from the month of September, 2008. Before I part with this case, I must record one thing that there appears to be some dispute as with regard to the payment of Rs. 90,000/- towards the arrear of maintenance. While this Court would not like to adjudicate this aspect but taking into consideration the future of both the son and daughter, this Court would direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 1 lac jointly in the name of his son and daughter under a fixed deposit in a nationalized bank or in a post office. Such fixed deposit will however be operated by the wife opposite party in capacity of their guardian for this limited purpose 3 and will have power to reinvest the said amount in their joint names. After the daughter acquires the age of eighteen years, the mother the opposite party will take out half of its amount if required for the purpose of marriage/education and remaining half will continue to be in the fixed deposit till the son acquires the age of twenty one years and would be utilized only towards the education of the son. The Family Court is also directed to make a periodical assessment of the smooth relationship of the petitioner and the opposite party for which purpose both the petitioner and the opposite party will appear once in every three months. In the event, the Court below finds that the opposite party was subjected to any physical or mental cruelty, it would be at liberty to pass an appropriate order for safeguarding the interest of the wife, opposite party as also the two children. It may in that event also impose further amount of maintenance not only for the wife or but also for the two children. It may take any other action which is required to be taken for the protection of the interest of the opposite party and the two children. Further, however the Court below upon assessment of the situation finds that the attitude of the wife, opposite party is unreasonable in any manner, it will have the liberty to reject such prayer of the opposite party. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party, submits that if the opposite party is satisfied with the behavior of the petitioner and/or his family members, she would withdraw all the criminal cases filed by her against the petitioner as also his family 4 members. Counsel for the opposite party further submits that the opposite party would however require some time to make assessment of the situation and therefore, action for withdrawal would be taken only within a period of one year of this order. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this civil revision application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)