F.A.No.344/2010
26.9.2011
Shri Y.K.Gupta, counsel for appellant.
Shri Rajnish Pandey, counsel for respondents. I.A.No.6078/2010 under section 5 of the Limitation Act.
There is delay of 92 days in filing this appeal.
For the reasons stated in the application, supported by
affidavit and looking to the fact that there is no counter to the
affidavit, delay in filing this appeal is condoned.
Heard on admission.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree
dated 25.11.2009 passed by First Additional Judge to the Court of
Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal, in case no.575/2008, by
which a petition filed by the respondent was allowed and the trial
Court directed appellant to make payment of Rs.2,000/- per month
for the maintenance of respondent no.2 Ku.Adiba Hussain, daughter
of appellant and respondent no.1.
Learned counsel for appellant submitted that the appellant is
not an earning person and is residing with his father, who is a
retired person. The amount is on the higher side, which may be
reduced to Rs.1,000/-. It is submitted that for this limited purpose,
this appeal may be admitted.
From the perusal of record, we find that the appellant was
earlier working as Marketing Executive in Suditi Hospital and was
residing in Kehkasha Apartment, Kohefiza, Bhopal. Looking to the
status of appellant and to the fact that now respondent no.2 must
be more than 3 years old, she requires minimum aforesaid amount
for her maintenance, the amount fixed by the trial Court appears to
be just and proper.
In the aforesaid order, we do not find any error warranting
our interference.
F.A.No.344/2010
In view of aforesaid, this appeal at the admission stage is
dismissed, with no order as to costs.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain)
JUDGE JUDGE
M