Allahabad High Court
SHRI LALIT KUMAR SINGHversusState of U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The revision lacks merit and is dismissed.
Summary
The revision petition was filed challenging an order dated 5 June 2024 of the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 4, Agra, which granted maintenance of Rs 12,000 per month to the minor son of the petitioner until he reaches majority. The petitioner argued that the amount was excessive and beyond his financial capacity, seeking a reduction or setting aside of the award. The respondent contended that the amount was reasonable and payable. The High Court examined the matrimonial dispute between the parents and emphasized the father's duty to provide for his child’s growing needs, including education and clothing. Finding no infirmity in the Family Court’s order, the Court dismissed the revision as lacking merit.
Issues considered
- Whether the maintenance award of Rs 12,000 per month is excessive and liable to be reduced or set aside.
Subjects
- maintenance
- family law
- criminal revision
- minor child
- matrimonial dispute
- financial capacity
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4226 of 2024
Shri Lalit Kumar Singh
.....Revisionist(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Archana Yadav, Sujan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Prakash Chandra Srivastava, Vishnu
Prakash, G.A.
Court No. - 86
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for opposite
party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State.
2. The instant criminal revision has been filed against the order dated
5.6.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 4,
Agra, by which opposite party No. 2 namely, Master Kumar Kavya alias
Ghatin has been awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per month
from the date of application, till he attains majority.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the revisionist that the amount
of Rs. 12,000/- is highly excessive, exorbitant and beyond the financial
resources of the revisionist, therefore the same is liable to be reduced or set
aside.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submitted that the said
amount of Rs. 12,000/- is not so excessive that the revisionist cannot pay.
6. Having considered the rival contentions and after going through the order
dated 5.6.2024, it is clear that there is matrimonial dispute between the
husband and wife, i. e. father and mother of opposite party no. 2, but because
of dispute between husband and wife, the children cannot be made to suffer,
particularly the minor son, who is of growing age and his needs are likely to
go up with the passage of time, such as expenditure on education and clothes
etc. and therefore, it is paramount duty of the father to take care of his
CRLR No. 4226 of 2024
2
children and in the present case, son of the revisionist, therefore no infirmity,
whatsoever is found in the order dated 5.6.2024, wherein the maintenance
has been awarded to none other than, the son of the revisionist.
7. In view of the above, the revision lacks merit and is hereby dismissed
March 18, 2026
HR
(Harvir Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
HEMANT RANJAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…