AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R K Saksena J.
A legally married woman moved a petition under Section 125 of the code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance allowance primarily on the round that her husbandopposite party had married another woman and had deserted her The claim was resisted by the husband but without success. The Magistrate by his order dated the 6th of September, 1983 allowed the application and granted Rs. ISO as monthly maintenance allowance payable by the opposite party husband who preferred a revision against chat order which was allowed in part on the 30th of January, 1984 the claim of the wife that she was entitled to maintenance allowance was accepted by the visional court as It, however, Seed the monthly amount of maintenance allowance to Rs. IOO per month The husband has come up to this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure primarily praying that the amount awarded as maintenance allowance is excessive. I have seen the record with the help of learned A. C A. and the learned counsel for the opposite party. There is a concurrent finding of the courts below that the opposite partywife is entitled to get maintenance allowance. noted above the amount fixed by the Magistrate has been reduced by the revisional court for good reasons. There is no valid ground to disturb the finding given .or. quantum of allowance. Moreover, a party who has been unsuccessful from two courts cannot come to this court labeling his petition as one under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This principle of law has bee, laid down in Rajan Kumar Manchanda's case reported in Judgment Today, 1987 JT (SC) 637.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed. The interim order dated 1421984
is vacated.