Gujarat High Court High Court

Prashant vs State on 5 May, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Prashant vs State on 5 May, 2011
Author: Md Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCR.A/1052/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1052 of 2011
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

PRASHANT
RANCHHODBHAI MANDAVIYA - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
YASH N NANAVATY for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR LR PUJARI, APP for Respondent(s) : 1, 
None
for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 05/05/2011  
 
ORAL ORDER

This Court has gone
through the order passed by the Trial Court. It is submitted by the
learned advocate for the applicant that after passing the order of
maintenance within a short span of time the respondent – wife
submitted an application for enhancement of maintenance and said
application was granted by the trial Court, enhancing the
maintenance from Rs.1500/- to Rs.3,000/-. The said order is
challenged before the Sessions Court by filing Revision Application,
which is numbered as Criminal Revision Application No.19 of 2010 and
the said Criminal Revision Application was partly allowed by the
Sessions Court and hence this application.

It is submitted by
Mr.Buch that there was no change of circumstances and question does
not arise to enhance maintenance.

This Court has gone
through the order passed by the trial Court as well as revisional
Court. It is observed by the trial Court that opportunity was given
to present petitioner – husband but he did not place on record
the pay slip. It is rightly observed by the trial Court that as per
6th Pay Commission there is considerable enhancement in
the pay-scale.

In view of above, no
illegality or perverseness is committed by the trial Court as well
as revisional Court. Hence this application is summarily rejected.

(M. D. SHAH,
J.)

kks

   

Top