CD i'a—-.5 S°% .. ... tt, ^^^^ ^^""^^ WSi^ Walts^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) Cr.R. No. 1 '? / /2006 APPLICANT VERSUS "~-^ •••^y .^ .^.'•' ^.c\^l^ ^'^ y. '^^ ^'f M '' , • ?-' Soumya Jeet Choudhary S/o- Ranjeet Choudhary, aged about 37 years, R/o- M.I.G.-579 ^» Padmnabhpur, District- Durg (C.G.) Pritha @ Mahima aged about 8 years D/o- Soumya Jeet Choudhary, Through her mother Reeta Choudhary, R/o- M.I.G. 11/70, Hudco, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) CRIMINAL REVISION UNDER SECTION 19 f4) OF THE FAMILYCOURTACT. ..._k_^ ^ XI-HC-78 sn^rqiTf^ite traT3T1??Ta>HI°h ^sg' 'fWM^, vnS\wie, Rioii'My C^'R<?'\,'. ivjQ'- l^i ! ^£>& WH^IT ^*rra» ^ 200 3<1^1 W<h ('^'1,'f'Sff) s^trRKTrfia'sn^r rivtl 21-07-2006 Smt. Somshukla Sarkar, Shri C.R.Sahu, learned counsfel Learned counsel for th| M.Cr.P.No.598/2006 for 9rant of dftc not pressed. Learned counsel for the rivtl be heard finally today at the stage This revision is finalty heardl Learned counsel for the apj that she would assail the impugneif the First Additional Pr'incipal M.J.C.No.500/2005 on the awarded as maintenance to the highly excessivein viere of the applicant as adduced before the Arguvnen'ts were heard on of maintenance awarded by the Leorned counse! for thel documentary evidance was adduceil the monthly earnings of the appljcc disputed that the non-applicant School at Shankara Vidyalaya, leai|ned counsel for the applicant. for the non-applicant. i^ applicant does not press on ^tay which is accordingly dismissed as 9roui(d nctn Fan|ity qiiiFCT'41-i tiit«iTfftofl'<Ri't<i< ^sri^ffsn^r parties pray that this revision may bf admission. today at the stage of admission. blicant at the very outset submitted order dated 21-02-2006 passed by Judge, Family Court, Our9 in that the amount of Rs.2,500/- |n-applicant, a girl aged 8 years was [vidence about the earnin9S of the Court, Durg. sole question whether the amount Court was excessive. non-applicant admitted that no before the trial Court relatin9 to Somyajit Choudhary. It is not was studying in En9lish Medium •-10, Bhilai Nagar. Para-7 of the - z - Fafnily the ppljcant PHitha Selctor ^ XI-HC-78 3!i^rq>rf^-iR7 ;raT3traTsh>1|ch !^S«') *flHdl sh*l|c(i 3^ •<<l<(lfl<<, aifl^'lto, Isldiuy __£^--taj-., |<s-o ' .V-S } ?R; 200 C, 3ll^s?l M^th (l,':<^°l<<,d') 'gTcnwtrf^fsn^T the upc|n impugned order reveals that revealed that his monthly inconle pcrents were also dependent Conside>'in9 the facts an<| of Rs.2,500/- awarded by the non-applicant, a child aged 8 yeijir my considered opinion, rt would of mointenonce to Rs.1,600/- pef In the result, this revisiijin 21-02-2006 passed by the First| Durg in AAJ.C.No.500/2005 herein shall pay Rs.1,500/- p4 appticant herein from the dote *i«(<M<ft-<*i[t<'-iT¥teI€l'<Rt<^i< ^srf^rsn^T stchds otf statement on oath of the appticant was not more than Rs.4,000/- and his him. cir-cumstances of the case, the amount imily Court, t)ury as maintenance to the appears to be on the hl9her side. In just and proper to reduce the amount month. is alfowed. The impu9ned order dated Additional Pr'incipal Judge.. Fcunily Court, modifi&d accordingly. The applicant r month os maintenance to the non- order of the Pamily Court, Durg. Fbmily veilirs te Sd/- DilipRaosaheb Deshmukh Judge