SARITA BHARTI Vs. SURESH KUMAR BHARTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision has filed by the applicant/wife against the order dtd. 28/6/2022 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Janjgir passed in MJC No.8/2021 whereby the learned Family Court after directing to deposit the arrears amount of Rs.108000.00 has disposed off the execution proceeding without examining the pending arrears.

(2.) Shri Ravindra Shrama, learned counsel for the applicant submits that learned executing court without examining whether any arrears of maintenance is still pending during the pendency of execution application after depositing Rs.108000.00 (One lac eight thousand) closed the execution proceeding by the impugned order which is illegal and not sustainable. He further submits that on 13/8/2019 in CRR No.77 of 2019 the co-ordinate Bench of this Court had enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs.5000.00 to the tune of Rs.9000.00 per month and the arrears of same is still pending. He would place reliance in matter of Smt. Shakila Praveen Vs. Firoz Ahmed reported in 2018 (1) CGLJ 351 and submits that it has been held in the said judgment that there was no need of filing a fresh petition during the pendency of the application under Sec. 125 (3) Cr.P.C. for maintenance which has fallen due for the period post application. In such case the reliance was placed in the matter of Shantha alias Ushadevi and another Vs. B.G. Shivananjappa, AIR 2005 SC 2410 and Poongodi and anr. Vs. Thangavel reported in 2013 AIR SCW 5764. He further submits that considering the prayer made by the applicant/wife the impugned order may be set aside or modified suitably.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/husband would support the impugned order and submits that to the some extent arrears amount has already been cleared however to the some extent it is pending which required to be assessed.