IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.850 of 2006 MD.SHAMSHAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 5. 26.8.2008. This Cr. Revision has been filed against the order dated 29.8.2006 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Samastipur in Maintenance Case No. 1 of 2002 thereby the petitioner has been directed to pay Rs.73,786/- only to opposite party no. 2 within a period of three months. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. The only submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Court against his own finding has allowed Rs.25000/- as cost of properties and cash given at the time of marriage. It is further submitted that in paragraph 11 of the impugned order the Court below has specifically held that the claim of the applicant that Rs.15,000/- cash and the articles worth Rs.35,000/- were given at the time of marriage is not sustainable in spite of that the court below has given a lumpsum amount of Rs.25,000/- against that head. On the other hand learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submitted that though opposite party has not been able to establish her case to that extent but the Court below has rightly allowed - 2 - lumpsum amount on mere presumption that some cash and articles are given at the time of marriage. Considered the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and also perused the impugned order. On perusal of paragraph 11 of the impugned order, it is quite clear that the opposite party no. 2 has failed to establish payment of cash and property worth Rs.40,000/- at the time of marriage. Hence giving a lumpsum amount of Rs.25,000/- against that head is bad and illegal. Accordingly, this application is allowed to that extent. Petitioner is directed to pay only the amount mentioned against item nos. I, II, III and V i.e. Rs.48,786/- within one month of this order failing which the Court below shall take coercive steps against this petitioner in accordance with the law. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)