YASHWANT SHILPKAR Vs. SAMTA SHILPKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY order dated 19-6-2001 passed in respondents maintenance application filed under Section 125, Cr. PC and registered as M. J. C. No. 50/2001, J. M. F. C, Jabalpur directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 1000/- p. m. to respondent No. 1 and Rs. 1500/- p. m. to respondent No. 2 as maintenance. Both the parties challenged the aforesaid order in Cr. R. Nos. 281/2001 and 282/2002 respectively which are disposed of by IV A. S. J. , Jabalpur by a common order dated 30-1-2002. The petitioner sought quashment of order dated 19-6-2001 passed by J. M. F. C. in MJC No. 50/2001 whereas the respondents filed the revision seeking enhancement in the rate of maintenance.

(2.) ON perusal of record of MJC No. 50/2001 it is noted that the maintenance petition was filed on 11-2-94 which for the first time stood disposed of on 16-11-99 in favour of respondent No. 2 Suvigya only. While holding respondent No. 1 not entitled for maintenance J. M. F. C. directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 500/- as maintenance to respondent No. 2 since the date of filing the petition. The respondents challenged the aforesaid order in Cr. R. No. 119/2002, on 21-8-2000 learned IV A. S. J. remanded the case with following directions :-

(3.) ON receipt of record of MJC No. 50/2001, after order of remand, the J. M. F. C. against disposed of MJC No. 50/2001 on merits, by order dated 19-6-2001 wherein the petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 1000/- p. m. and Rs. 1500/- p. m. as maintenance to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively on the basis of objective and exhaustive assessment of evidence of both the parties. The learned J. M. F. C. recorded affirmative findings that the respondents have no source of income of their own whereas the petitioner being capable of maintaining the respondents, has neglected to maintain them and thus respondents are entitled to receive maintenance from the petitioner. On the basis of appreciation of evidence, on the point of income of the petitioner and so also the expenses to be borne on the education of respondent No. 2, learned J. M. F. C. fixed the quantum. Then Revisional Court has also found to have appreciated and assessed the evidence of both the parties while confirming the findings of Lower Court.