CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Ashok Kumar vs Krishna Devi and Another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 3 May 1999 · Citation: (1999) 3 ACR 2552

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.C. Jain, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 127
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 1236 of 1997
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 349 words

M.C. Jain, J.—I have heard the learned Counsel for the revisionists and have gone through the judgment of the Family Court, Kanpur Nagar dated 24.7.1997 passed in case No. 586/1993 u/s 127. Code of Criminal Procedure I have also considered the grounds of revision.

2.

A sum of Rs. 200 per month was granted to the wife Krishna Devi-Respondent No. 1 against the revisionist under the judgment dated 16.8.1985. The circumstances changed so much so that the salary of the revisionist increased to Rs. 2,500 per month from Rs. 1,000 per month as it was on 16.8.1985, The wife made an application of increasing her maintenance allowance and that of her daughter which was fixed at Rs. 100 per month under the judgment dated 16.8.1985. On total consideration, the Court below increased the maintenance allowance to the wife from Rs. 200 to Rs. 500 per month and to the daughter from Rs. 100 to Rs. 400 per month. The revisionist (husband) has not challenged the maintenance allowance increased for the daughter, but he challenges the maintenance allowance increased for wife-Respondent No. 1. The learned Counsel for the revisionist argues that he has married second time and the circumstances have changed for him also in as much as his expenditure has increased.

3.

The point of the matter is that the revisionist is liable to maintain the Respondent No. 1. It is not shown that his salary was not raised to Rs. 2,500 per month, when the Respondent No. 1 made an application for increase of her maintenance allowance. Inflation is a stark reality. In these days of dearness, the maintenance allowance of Rs. 500 per month is just sufficient to keep an individual above starvation level. There is also justification for the grant of increased maintenance allowance to the wife from the date of her application when revisionist was getting raised salary of Rs. 2,500 per month.

4.

The revision has no merit and it is hereby dismissed. The stay order dated 26.9.1997 stands vacated.

5.

The office shall send a copy of this order to the lower Court.