BLASIYUS KERKETTA Vs. DEEPMALA KERKETTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition has been preferred under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act assailing the order dated 23.12.2016 passed by the Judge Family Court, Jashpur in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 80/2015.

(2.) By way of the said impugned order, the Court below in a proceeding under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code') has allowed the application and enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.6,000/- payable to the Non-Applicants.

(3.) The Applicant in the instant case has challenged the impugned order on two grounds. Firstly, it is alleged that the Court below has committed an error in allowing the application from the retrospective date i.e. from the date of filing of the application 21.08.2014. Learned counsel for the Applicants submits that the Court below could not have made the order effective from a retrospective date while allowing the application for enhancement of maintenance under Section 127 of the Code and prayed that the same should only be prospective. He relied upon the judgment of High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Ramaji Vs. Shanti Bai decided on 18.10.2016.