Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Chattisgarh High Court

Rakesh Singh Thakur vs Smt. Madhvi Singh on 10 February, 2017

Author: Prashant Kumar Mishra

Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                                                  NAFR

       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                          CRR No. 170 of 2017

     • Rakesh Singh Thakur S/o Late Jagdishwar Singh, Aged About 39
       Years, R/o Rajapara, Balaji Road, Kanker, Police Station-
       Kanker, District- North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

                                                           ---- Petitioner

                                Versus

     • Smt. Madhvi Singh, W/o Rakesh Singh Thakur, Aged About 26
       Years, R/o Rajapara, Balaji Road, Kanker, Police Station-
       Kanker, District- North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh, At Present
       R/o House No. 11, Abhishek Vihar, Phase- 2, Mangla, Police
       Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur,
       Chhattisgarh.

                                                        ---- Respondent

For Petitioner Shri Aman Kesharwani, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 10/02/2017

1. Petitioner would call in question the order passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur directing him to pay interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent wife.

2. Indisputably, the petitioner is working as Constable in the Chhattisgarh Armed Forces. The learned Judge of the Family Court has observed that as per the pay slip of January 2016, the petitioner is receiving Rs.26,710/- as gross monthly salary after all necessary deductions. Nothing has been placed before this Court to controvert the said observation.

3. In view of the fact that the arrangement is only interim in nature and the petitioner is admittedly a government servant, he is not going to suffer any hardship if the amount of Rs.10,000/- per month is paid to the respondent wife.

4. No case for entertaining this revision application is made out. It is dismissed in limine.

Sd/-

JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala