IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. REV. No.544 of 2008
PERMESHWAR PRASAD GUPTA
...PETITIONER
Versus
1. STATE OF BIHAR
2. RAJIYA DEVI.
...OPPOSITE PARTIES
-----------
04. 27.09.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner.
In spite of service of notice, nobody has appeared on
behalf of o.p.no.2 to contest the present application.
The husband-petitioner challenges the order dated
08.04.2008, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Motihari in Case No.M.211/05, whereby on a consideration of
materials on record, the court below has directed for payment of
maintenance in sum of Rs.800/- per month from the date of the
application, i.e. 19.07.2006.
While assailing the order, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that court below has found from the report
furnished by the Officer in-charge of Mehasi police station that
O.P. Permeshwar Pd. Gupta (petitioner herein) had illicit
relationship with the applicant(Rajiya Devi). Admitted position
is that after enormous lapse of time, the present application has
been filed. The husband-petitioner seems to be 80 years old.
Learned court below has found as under in the impugned order:
“I find that O.P. Permeshwar Pd.
Gupta has illicit relationship with the applicant
Rajiya Devi and from that illicit relationship with
O.P. applicant gave birth to a son namely Dilip
Kumar who is aged about 18 years and O.P. did
not pay even single farthing to the applicant for
her maintenance as well as her son. In the facts
2
and circumstances stated above I direct O.P.
Permeshwar Pd. Gupta to pay Rs.800/- per month
to the applicant Rajiya Devi as ad interim
maintenance with effect from 19.7.2006 i.e. the
date of filing of ad interim maintenance.”
It is submitted that in view of the
findings/observations so recorded by learned court below, the
order impugned appears is contrary to the provision of the Act.
Under the impugned order the son has not been found entitled to
maintenance.
Learned APP on perusal of the order impugned is
not in a position to controvert the submissions advanced on
behalf of the petitioner.
Having regard to the aforesaid findings of the court,
this Court is satisfied that the order impugned requires
interference.
Consequently, that part of the order whereby learned
court below has directed for payment of ad-interim
maintenance in the sum of Rs.800/- to the applicant is quashed
and set aside. Learned Principal Judge, Family Court shall
proceed and dispose of the application finally after allowing the
parties to adduce evidence uninfluenced by the present order.
( Kishore K. Mandal )
hr