HIGH COUT O CHTTIGARH AT BILASPU R F HAS R CRIMINAL REVISION N0. 669 OF 2007 Thyodor Minj, S/O Shri Albinus, aged about 38 years, by Caste Uraon, Occupation—Service (Railway Electronic Department) r/o Vilge hpur, present r/o Pendraroad Railway Qarter Pendra, Thana Pendra, Distt. Bilaspur C.G.). - Vinod S/O Thyodor Minj Age about 1 Year 4 months, Minor through Natural Gaurdian Mother, Sushila Khalco, aged about 34 Years W/o Alfos R/o Villhge Godhanpur, Ambikapur, P. S. Sadar Ambikapur, Tahsil Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja (C.G.). CRIMINAL REVISION U[S 19 (4! OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT. b (SB :Hon’le Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:- Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate for the applicant. Shri A.K. Prasad, Advocate for the non—applicant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 07/04/201 1) By this criminal revision under Section 19 (4) of the Family Courts Act applicant has challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 24/ 10/07 passed by Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur, Dirict Surguja (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case o. 73/2005 whereby learned Judge, Family Cour,‘ Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) has awarded maintenance of Rs. 1000/— per month to non—applicant‘Vinod, 1 year 85 4 months aged child as a illegitimate child of applint 2. Mr. Sunil Sahu, counsel for the applicant and Mr. A.K. Prasad, counse for the non—applicant are heard. Order impugned and record of Courts below peruSed. fo - Learned counsel r the applicant submits that in order to claim maintence on behalf of the non—applicant is a illegitimate child, non-applicant was under obligation to proof the fact that relationship between present applicant an mother of non— applicant was one of monogamy and there was no third person APPLICANT la Sa u ( NONAPPLICANT d VERSUS a 20 st N t ca. l an d kfw2‘ .» @ between her and applicant and as a result of their relation, non— applicant was born but non-applicant has not adduced any evidence to show such nature and quality. While awarding the maintenance, Court below has not considered the aforesaid requirement and thereby committed an illegality. - On the other hand, learned counsel for the non—applicant opposed the criminal revision and submits that statement of present applicant and the letters written by applicant to mother of non- applicant are sufficient to establish the aforesaid facts that present applicant was having love affair with mother of non— applicant and they were virtually residing as husband & wife and as a result of their marital relation, non—applicant was born. While awarding the maintenance to non—applicant, Court below has not committed any illegality. Evidence of both the parties specially the evidence of applicant, his admission relating to relation with mother of non—applicant and letters vide EX. P-2 to P-5 exchange between the parties are written by applicant are sufficient to establish the fact that as a result of monogamous relation between applicant and mother of non-applicant, non—applicant was born therefore, he is entitled for maintenance as a illegitimate child of applicant. While awarding the maintenance of Rs. IOOO/—, Court below has not committed any illegality. Consequently, criminal revision is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. /‘4##i er.‘ LA. No. 1 is also dismissed. _ Sdl- T. P. Sharma‘ ;_ \‘ Judge