SMT. GUNJAN RAY Vs. SRI ARINDAM RAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since accommodation on two earlier occasions for the purpose of settlement between the parties had gone in vain, the matter is taken up for hearing and disposal on merit.

(2.) Heard Mr Basu and Mr Hassan representing the petitioner-wife and the opposite party-husband respectively.

(3.) The application under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India has been directed assailing Order No. 45 dated June 7, 2016 passed by learned Principal Judge-in-charge, Family Court, Calcutta in Matrimonial Suit No. 177 of 2012 rejecting an application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposing enhancement of maintenance pendente lite from Rs. 35,000 to Rs. 60,000.