RANJAN KUMAR Vs. PRITI KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties.

(2.) The petitioner has moved the Court under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 12.01.2018 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Begusarai in Maintenance Case No. 119-M of 2016, filed by the opposite parties, who are wife and son of the petitioner, by which the petitioner has been directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month as maintenance.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order impugned suffers from glaring irregularities. It was submitted that sufficient opportunity of contesting the case has not been provided to the petitioner. In support of such contention, learned counsel drew the attention of the Court to paragraph 2 of the impugned order in which it had been noted that the petitioner had appeared on 12.09.2017 and then it was further noted that till 21.12.2017, there was no response from the petitioner and he was debarred from contesting the case on 31.12.2017. It was submitted that thereafter final order has been passed on 12.01.2018. Learned counsel further submitted that there has been no discussion in the order with regard to the opposite party no. 1 not being able to maintain herself or her son i.e., opposite party no. 2 and without such finding, award of maintenance is legally unsustainable.