”ié HIGE-I COURT OF CHHATTESGARH AT EELASPUR CR.REV. NO. 4-?41’2094 ‘ Ghasi Das, aged about 40 years, SfO. Bixju Das, Rio. Village Beiakchar, 13S. Baico i‘iagar, Tab. and Distt. Korba (CG) APPLICANT Versus NGN—APPLECANTS Smt. Suraj Bai W/o, Ghasi Das, ag6d VA 4O years K11. Indu, D,’o. Ghasi Das, Aged ’20 y6ars, Both rfo. Behmd Housing board Balco Nagar, Korba, Tab. and Distt. Korba (CG) $RREV. UEDER SECTEON 397/401 $F THE €R.P.C‘. {$3 :Eon’ble Mr. T“P.Sharma, J.} Prssaxlt: Shm‘ Rudrax1ath Mukhexjge, counsel for tha appiicmlt. Non€ appears for the non-applicant. ORDER {Passed on 19th March 2008) The app1icant, bsmg aggn'eved by the ordsr dated. 21.7.2004, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Korba, 1'11 Cr. Rev. No. 25712004 Wherby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has modified the order dated 28.11.2003 passed by the JMFC, Korba 1'11 MJC No. 22/2902 alid enhanced maintenance from Rs. 700/- to Rs. 1090,! —, has flled ibis revision. Heard. Notices have been sewed on non—applicajlts but none present on behalf of the non—applicants. It is argued on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is a retired persoa having no means to maintain therefore, maintenance awarded against him is not just. Order impugned perused. im i The applicant is under the obligation to maiwtajn his Wife Th6 mainEenance awardad is Rs. 1000/ —, which is not exc€ss;ive. In case of aily Chajlge of status, the applicallt may agitate his claim beib‘re trial Court und€r Section 127 0f ma Cade. Cons€quent1y, fh€re is no subsztailcs in 111E petitiml alid is dismissed at the motion stage itself.