AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
D.K. Sinha, J.—This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 26.08.2010 passed by the Principal Judge Family Court, Ranchi in the proceeding u/s 125 Code of the Criminal Procedure in maintenance case No. 12/2005 by which the Petitioner was called upon to pay Rs. 2500/- per month consolidated to the opposite party No. 2 wife and their minor son Anmol.
Opposite party No. 2 has entered appearance by executing Vakalatnama.
Heard Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mrs. Vandana singh on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 and 3. On last date, the learned Counsel Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha offered on behalf of the Petitioner to pay Rs. 2000/- only per month on compromise basis to the opposite party No. 2 and 3 by expressing financial constraints that he was a para teacher and was getting a meagre amount of Rs. 4000/- after enhancement and therefore, he was not in a position to give Rs. 2000/- per month to the opposite party No. 2 and 3. The counsel for the opposite party No. 2 after seeking instruction accepted the offer but with the condition that the Petitioner would pay monthly maintenance (agreed) amount regularly by 10th of every succeeding month. She further submitted that the Petitioner has not paid the ordered amount since passing of the order.
Mr. P.K. Sinha appearing for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner being a para teacher would not be able to pay the arrears by making one time full payment as he was directed to pay the litigation cost to the extent of Rs. 5000/- lump sum.
Considered the offer and the acceptance made on behalf of the parties the Petitioner Rajendra Bhagat (Oraon) is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2000/- per month to the O.P. No. 2 and 3 herein on the compromise and resolution of the dispute by modifying the order where in the Petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 2500/- per month. The Petitioner is further directed to pay the monthly maintenance by 10th of each of succeeding month positively together arrears and litigation cost in 5 equal instalments, failing to which the opposite party No. 2 and 3 would be at liberty to realize the same by the due process of court.
This order does not preclude the O.P. No. 2 and 3 to agitate u/s 127 code of Criminal Procedure in due course according to need and financial capability of the Petitioner.