Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.RA/481/2009 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
REVISION APPLICATION No. 481 of 2009
=========================================================
VINODBHAI
BABUBHAI PRAJAPATI - Applicant(s)
Versus
VARSHABEN
D/O RAMESHBHAI DEVJIBHAI PRAJAPATI W/O VINODBHAI - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
MP PRAJAPATI for Applicant(s) : 1,
MR SUNIL C PATEL for
Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 15/07/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Petitioner
is husband of respondent No.1. He has challenged an order dated
10.6.2009 passed by the learned Judge of Family Court, Surat by
which he is ordered to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.2,500/- to his
wife.
Counsel
for the petitioner submitted that Advocate for the petitioner did
not remain present. The decision was, therefore, given ex-parte.
He, therefore, requested the matter be remanded for fresh
consideration. He submitted that petitioner is doing work of tiles
repairing/setting and is unable to pay the amount.
I
have also heard learned advocate for the respondent.
Considering
this maintenance proceedings and the fact that remanding of the
proceedings would mean substantial further expenditure both for the
husband as well as wife, I am not inclined to accept the request for
remand.
The
assertion of the wife before the Family Court was that the husband
was doing construction labour work and earn considerably income in
every month. Even if this is not believed, as per the Counsel for
the petitioner himself stated that husband is a skilled labourer
engaged in masonry work in the construction contracts.
Considering
the rates for such skilled labouers, direction for payment of
maintenance of Rs.2,500/- cannot be said to be excessive. It is not
the case of the petitioner that he has other additional
responsibility.
In
the result, petition fails and dismissed.
(AKIL
KURESHI, J.)
(ashish)
Top