RAM MOORAT GUPTA Vs. JUDGE FAMILY COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C, Mishra, J. This revision is directed against the order dated 26-3-98 passed by the Judge, Family Court Gorakhpur awarding Rs. 500/- per month to Smt. Sunita Gupta and Rs. 400/- per month to the minor son Sonu from the date of application.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the revisionist contended that the learned Judge committed illegality in awarding more maintenance than demanded by the opposite parties and, therefore, the order is erroneous. Reliance was placed on copy of the application annexed with the stay application. THE prayer clause discloses that a sum of Rs. 300 per month was prayed as maintenance for the son Sonu.

(3.) IN the case before us even if the agreement is accepted that by mutual agreement the parties had decided to severe their marital relations even then the wife was entitled to get maintenance in view of decision of the Supreme Court referred to above. The Supreme Court held that any agreement to live separately may be valid during the period when the marriage subsists and not thereafter. IN that case the Supreme Court held that on account of divorce the wife had no option but to live separately and, therefore, till she was re-married she was entitled to receive maintenance. The above decision applies with full force to the facts before us. Moreover the alleged agreement has been seriously disputed and was not held to be genuine document by the learned Judge. He also accepted the case of the applicant that the revisionist has remar ried in view of the admission of the revisionist and, therefore, he could not compel his wife to live with him.