AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.V. Pinto, J.—Heard both sides.
This petition is filed seeking to modify the order dated 25.8.2011 passed in Crl.A.No. 593/2011 by the Principal City Civil & Sessions Judge & Presiding Office'''', Fast Track Court-IV, Bangalore, in which, the learned Sessions Judge has modified the order passed by the Magistrate in Crl. Misc No. 69/2011, The learned Magistrate by order dated 27.6.2011 has directed that the petitioner herein shall pay a sum of Rs. 6,000/-- per month to petitioner No. 1 and Rs. 3,000/- each to petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 [in Cri. Misc. No. 69/2011] towards their maintenance from the (sic) of the petition. It is also further directed that the respondent shall pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month to Petitioner No.2 from the date of petition till he attained majority. The respondent filed an appeal before Sessions Court and in an interim application filed u/s 389 Cr.P.C., before the learned Sessions Judge, the said Court directed that the order of the learned Magistrate above shall be stayed on the condition that the petitioner herein shall deposit a sum of Rs. 1,500/- per month to each for Respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4 as maintenance from the date of petition and to deposit Rs. 1,500/- per month to Petitioner No.2 from the date of petition till he attained the age of majority.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner No.2 has already attained the age of majority even as on the date of filing the petition and-therefore the question of granting the maintenance in the said petition does not arise. He further submit; that the amount of 71,500/- per month ordered by the learned Sessions Judge is excessive and he submits that he is prepared to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,000/- per month to all the petitioners In view of the fact that his monthly income is Rs. 4,000/- as documented inn the copies of cash vouchers produced by him.
It is seen that the petitioner has not contested the matter and the order challenged before the Sessions Judge is an order passed without contest. The learned Sessions Judge has passed the Interim Order and the Sessions Judge has got power to pass the Final Order after hearing the parties. In the meantime, interfering with the discretion exercised by the learned Sessions Judge may not be in the interest of justice. However, it is necessary that the appeal before the Learned Sessions Judge shall be disposed of at an early date.
In view of the above, this petition is dismissed. The learned Sessions Judge is also directed to decide as to the amount, payable to the respondent.
From the Birth Certificate produced in this petition, it is seen that the date of birth of the second petitioner is 29.4.1991. Hence, it is seen that the second petitioner has attained the age of majority on 29.4.2009. The learned Sessions Judge is requested to take note of this change of circumstances while disposing of the petition finally and to pass appropriate orders regarding the claim of the second petitioner.
Petition is disposed of.