ATUL RATRA Vs. POOJA RATRA & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by order dated 20.12.2018 passed by 2nd Additional Principal Judge, family Court, Jabalpur in MJC No.426/2017 whereby learned trial Court dismissed the objection filed by the applicant and directed the applicant to pay Rs.8,000/- from 13.02.2017.

(2.) Facts giving rise to this revision petition, in brief, are that respondent No.1 is legally wedded wife of the applicant. Respondent No.2 was born out of their wedlock. Respondent filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before family Court vide order dated 13.02.2017 Court concluded that respondent No.1 is not entitled for maintenance and directed the applicant to pay Rs.8,000/- per month as a maintenance allowance to respondent No.2.

(3.) This order affirmed by this Court in Criminal Revision No.612/2017 vide order dated 18.02.2019. The applicant further alleges in the petition that respondents have filed an application before the family Court under Section 125 (3) of Cr.P.C. for recovery of maintenance arrears on 21.09.2017 and claiming the amount of Rs.1,07,000/- as arrears. Wrongly calculating the amount, applicant filed a reply of that application and stated therein that the previous awarded interim maintenance allowance of Rs.15,000/- per month has been reduced in the criminal revision No.1716/2014 vide order dated 15.12.2016 to Rs.13,000/-. The applicant had already paid Rs.84,000/- till filing of the application under Section 125 (3) of Cr.P.C. dated 15.12.2017 and later on family Court vide order dated 20.12.2018 finally awarded Rs.8,000/- monthly maintenance allowance to the respondent No.2 and not allowed the application as far as respondent No.1 is concerned, this order confirmed in the criminal revision. But later on, family Court vide order dated 20.12.2018, which is impugned herein is wrongly calculated the amount and directed the applicant to pay remaining unpaid amount of interim maintenance not considered the ground that applicant has already deposited the whole amount as ordered by the family Court as well as revisional Court, no arrears remain left as an arrears against the applicant, therefore, he prays to set aside the order.