BEGAM JESMINE AKTAR Vs. ABUL KHAYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. Sengupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. B. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) By means of this petition, the judgment and order dated 15.09.2018 of the Addl. Judge, Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala has been challenged on the solitary ground that despite the daughter of the petitioner No.1 and the respondent is living with the petitioner No.1, the Addl. Judge, Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala did not grant any maintenance for the said daughter. However, by the said order a sum of Rs.4000/- per month and Rs.2000/- per month were granted as the monthly maintenance allowance respectively in favour of the petitioner No.1 and 2. By the said Judgment and order, the mode of payment has been clearly stipulated by the Addl. Judge, Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala.

(3.) Mr. A. Senguta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has clearly submitted that the said daughter namely Rejioyona Khayeri Eshita was not the petitioner of the petition filed under Section 125 of the CrPC nor even in this petition. However, Mr. A. Senguta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in the deposition, the petitioner No.1 has categorically stated that at that time both the children were living with her (the petitioner No.1). Despite that the Addl. Judge, Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala has not made any provision of maintenance in favour of the said daughter. Thus, being aggrieved, the petitioner No.1 being the mother and natural guardian of the said daughter has approached this court for granting the maintenance.