Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Rajashree Bagchi vs Sourav Bagchi on 14 May, 2024
14.05. 2024
Item No.3
Ali
Ct. no.25
CRR 3244 of 2017
+
IA No.CRAN 1 of 2023
Smt. Rajashree Bagchi
Vs.
Sourav Bagchi
Mr. Achin Jana
Mr. Suman Chakraborty
.....for the petitioner.
Mr. Prosenjit Ghosh
Mr. Bhaskar Dolui
.... for the respondent
In Re.:CRAN 1 of 2023 This is an application for modification of order dated 11th July, 2023 passed by this Court in CRR No. 3244 of 2017.
Learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent of the CRR filed the instant CRAN application on the prayer of modification and/or recall the impugned order.
Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the husband/petitioner submits that the wife is a professional dancer and she is regularly performing the dance programme in various functions. The income as assessed by this Court at the time of passing the impugned order dated 11th July, 2023 appears to be improper. So, he prayed for recalling the impugned order dated 11th July, 2023.
In support of his contentions, he cited annexed several documents.
Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the wife/opposite party i.e. the petitioner of the CRR submits that the 2 instant application being CRAN 1 of 2023 is barred under the provision of Section 362 of CrPC. He further submits that this Court has already considered the entire aspects and after exchange of affidavit, the impugned order was passed on 11th July, 2023. He submits that there is no error apparent in the impugned judgment itself. Thus, the instant application is liable to be dismissed.
Heard the learned advocates perused the application and grounds stated therein.
It is the main ground of the petitioner that the wife i.e. the petitioner of CRR is a professional dancer and she is regularly performing in several dance functions; as the income as a professional dancer was not considered by this Court at the time of passing the impugned judgment on 11th July, 2023. So, he preferred this application to recall the judgment passed by this Court on 11th July, 2023.
It appears that the entire matter was placed earlier before this Court at the time of hearing of the matter. It further appears that the matter was heard on merit in presence of both the parties and extensive hearing has been done. It further appears that affidavits are exchanged between the parties before the hearing being done. However, it appears from the affidavits that the point as raised by the present petitioner/husband was argued on the earlier occasion; moreover, this point may very well be raised before the appropriate Magistrate under an application under Section 127 CrPC. According to the provision under Section 127 CrPC the maintenance amount can be altered on proof of changed circumstances. The prayer of the present petitioner may be 3 maintained before the concerned Magistrate. So, I make it clear that I find no materials to entertain the application filed by the petitioner/husband. Thus, the said application is hereby turned down.
Accordingly, the application being CRAN 1 of 2023 is thus, disposed of.
( Subhendu Samanta, J.)