The High Court reduced the amount of maintenance from Rs.2,000/ to Rs.750/ to appellant No.1 wife and from Rs.1,000/ to Rs.750/ to appellant No.2 daughter.
After deduction, his pay packet was of Rs.9,831 76.
Shortly stated the facts of the case are that the marriage between appellant No.1 and the respondent was solemnized according to Hindu rites, customs and ceremonies before more than three decades.
Delay of eight days in filing Special Leave Petition was companydoned and numberice was issued to the respondent.
280 of 1997 claiming maintenance of Rs.500/ p.m. for appellant No.1 and Rs.500/ p.m. for appellant No.2.
The High Court also directed that the amount of maintenance would be payable to the applicants appellants number from the date of the application i.e. July 21, 1997 but from the date of the order i.e. November 29, 2006.
The appellants filed a petition on September 12, 2006 with a prayer to direct the respondent to pay arrears of maintenance which came to Rs.11,600/ and the Family Court on October 30, 2006, allowed the application and directed the respondent to pay the entire amount of the arrears in lump sum by the next date of hearing.
On November 20, 1999, an application was filed by the appellants requesting the Court to grant interim maintenance during the pendency of proceedings before the Court.
By the said order, the High Court partly allowed the revision filed by the respondent husband and modified the order passed by the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur on October 30, 2006 in Miscellaneous Case No.
Appellant No.2 Kumari Babli is the youngest among all and she is the only child staying with her mother appellant No.1.
The matter was finally disposed of by the Family Court on November 29, 2006 and the learned Principal Judge of the Family Court directed the respondent to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/ p.m. to applicant appellant No.1 wife and Rs.1,000/ p.m. to applicant appellant No.2 minor daughter with effect from the date of application i.e. July 21, 1997 with further order to pay arrears within three months of the order after deducting the amount which had already been paid under the interim order passed by the Court earlier.
The appellant was dissatisfied with the order passed by the Principal Judge of the Family Court and preferred Criminal Revision No.
67 of 2007.
During the pendency of proceedings, however, Family Court came to be established and the case was transferred to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur.
From the evidence, it was clear that the respondent was working as Cashier with the State Bank of India, Bihita Branch and was getting gross salary of Rs.18,508 98.
Case No.
On July 21, 1997, the appellants filed a case for maintenance in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter referred to as the Code Misc.
From the said wedlock, nine children were born.
67 of 2007 in the High Court.
The High Court partly allowed the Revision and modified the direction issued by the Family Court.
Considering the nature of the litigation, the Registry was directed by an order dated April 16, 2008 to place the matter for final disposal on a number miscellaneous day and that is how the matter is placed before us.
At the time of filing of the application, she was of twelve years.
280 of 1997, renumbered as No.1 of 2005.
The said order is challenged by the appellants in the present appeal.
K. THAKKER, J. Leave granted.
It was the case of the appellant No.1 that her husband had neglected to maintain his wife appellant No.1 as also his legitimate daughter appellant No.2.
The present appeal is filed by appellant No.1 wife and appellant No.2 daughter of respondent herein Krishan Bhagwan Pathak.
The appellants have approached this Court being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna on May 3, 2007 in Criminal Revision No.
On September 5, 2007, the matter was placed for admission hearing.
The respondent retired from service in January, 2006.
The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate allowed the said application, granted the prayer and fixed interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.300/ p.m. for each of the applicants with effect from February 12, 1998.
The parties, thereafter, led the evidence which was closed on September 3, 2001 and the case was adjourned for final arguments.
