AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Barin Ghosh, C.J.
Clarification Application No. 278 of 2011
The words, "If any amount is paid u/s 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure by the Petitioner to the Respondent, the same shall be adjusted against the amount of Rs. 5,000/- per month directed to be paid by this Court" is causing the confusion. In fact, a proceeding was initiated u/s 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In that proceeding, there was a direction to pay maintenance. Such maintenance was paid for sometime. Subsequent thereto, that proceeding was compromised. When no order was passed for payment of maintenance, in as much as the husband and the wife represented to the Court that they will henceforth live together. Subsequent thereto, wife was compelled to initiate a proceeding under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. In that, the Magistrate awarded maintenance of Rs. 7,000/-. The Sessions Judge, at the instance of the husband, refused to interfere. This Court, as an interim measure, reduced the quantum of such maintenance from Rs. 7,000/- to Rs. 5,000/-. While doing so, the above observation was made. The said observation was made only for the purpose of ensuring that wife does not get anything more than Rs. 5,000/- per month. The Court did not permit the husband to adjust amount paid on earlier occasions in a closed proceedings with the amount directed to be paid by the Court by its order dated 14th June, 2010.
With the above clarification, the application made therefore is disposed of.