DINESH SHARMA Vs. RUPA RANI SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The petitioner, husband of the opposite party, being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dated 17.04.2010 passed in Maintenance Case No.19M of 2003 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger, allowing the claim of maintenance in favour of the opposite party as also for minor son, born out of the wedlock of the petitioner and the opposite party, has preferred the present revision application under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, questioning the correctness, legality and propriety of the impugned order.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no dispute with respect to relationship between the petitioner and the opposite party and both of them are legally wedded husband and wife respectively. According to the learned counsel a son was born out of their wedlock and he is living with the opposite party, but that is also not in dispute. The only dispute raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the opposite party is employed and is working as Panchayat teacher drawing a fixed salary of Rs. 6000/- per month and is able to maintain herself, yet her claim for maintenance has been allowed by the impugned judgment. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though this issue was raised by the petitioner before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger, but without considering this aspect of the matter, the claim of maintenance has been arbitrarily allowed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger. According to the learned counsel, in view of the aforesaid factual position, the impugned order is not sustainable and is fit to be set aside by this Court.