Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mohd. Jahid vs Smt. Roshan Aara@Najiya on 30 October, 2018
1 CRR-5115-2018
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRR-5115-2018
(MOHD. JAHID Vs SMT. ROSHAN AARA@NAJIYA)
1
Jabalpur, Dated : 30-10-2018
Shri M.P. Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner.
This criminal revision has been filed by the petitioner to quash the order dated
07.09.2018 passed by learned Principle Judge, Family Court, Burhanpur in MJC No.
354/2017.
Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned trial Judge awarded
the interim maintenance to the respondent-applicant No. 1, 2 & 3 vide order dated
21.09.2017 with this condition that the order will be effective till one month. If respondent delayed the trial, the order of interim maintenance will be canceled but the respondent-applicant No.1 did not produced her evidence on so many dates. Then, he filed an application to cancel the order of maintenance. But learned trial Judge rejected the application of the respondent No.2-applicant.
On perusal of the record, it is found evident that the trial Judge has found that petitioner/non-applicant did not pay interim maintenance regularly so there is no necessity to cancel the order of maintenance. Petitioner/non applicant was instructed to pay interim maintenance as Rs. 1,300/- per month for respondent No. 1 and Rs. 400/- per month for respondent No. 3 & 4 respectively. It is admitted that respondent No.1-applicant is his wife and respondent No. 2 & 3 are his children. So it is a pious duty of the petitioner/non-applicant to pay maintenance to his wife and children and if he did not pay interim maintenance, then, trial Court is not bound to modify and cancel his order. So there is no perversity or illegality in the impugned order and the petition is liable to be dismissed.
Hence the petition is dismissed.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE Pallavi Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA Date: 2018.11.01 17:25:27 +05'30'