ANJALI KUMARI Vs. CHANDRESHWAR PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite party. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 21.5.2011 passed in Misc. Case No. 44 of 2009 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi, whereby maintenance granted to the petitioner from her husband-opposite party was enhanced to Rs. 2000/- p.m. from the date of passing of the order by the Court below. It appears from the impugned order itself that the application was filed by the petitioner for seeking enhancement of her maintenance to Rs. 4000/-p.m., from Rs. 1000/- p.m., which she was allowed by order dated 4.12.2008.

(2.) IT appears from the impugned order that the Court below found that the opposite party was working in Jharkhand Tribal Development Society and his salary was Rs. 9329/- p.m. in the year 2009 and on the basis of earning of the opposite party, maintenance granted to the petitioner was enhanced from Rs. 1000/- p.m. to Rs. 2000/-p.m. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the income of the opposite party, the maintenance of the petitioner aught to have been enhanced to Rs. 4000/- p.m. However, the learned counsel has also pointed out from the revision application that presently after 6th Pay Revision, the opposite party is getting the salary of Rs. 5200-20200/- plus Grade Pay Rs. 2800/- p.m. and he has other income from cultivation etc. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that it is a fit case for enhancement of maintenance amount of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the maintenance aught to have been allowed to the petitioner from the date of filing the application, which has not been done by the Court below. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.