Concealment of material facts by a party can lead to modification of maintenance, and the Family Court may grant appropriate maintenance from the date the Claimant is entitled to if facts were concealed in earlier proceedings.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

1. The Petitioner assails the judgment dated 19th July 2010 whereby the application of the Respondent u/s 127 Cr.P.C. for enhancement of the maintenance amount was allowed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Courts, Rohini, Delhi. Learned counsel for the Petitioner primarily assails this order on the ground that the same was in violation of the settlement arrived at between the parties in the Mediation Cell, Tis Hazari on 18th April, 2006 and subsequently endorsed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 157 of 2005. The learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that a consent order cannot be altered or reviewed. There was no material before the learned Trial Court to come to the conclusion that the Petitioner had suppressed material facts. In any case the learned Trial Court could not have revised the maintenance for the period even prior to the date of filing the application u/s 127 Cr.P.C. It is further contended that besides the maintenance amount agreed upon between the parties, the Petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000/- at the time of anticipatory bail in lieu of streedhan items in favour of the Respondent on which she was earning the interest and also has a house to live in.

2. Learned counsel for the Respondent on the other hand contends that the Petitioner concealed facts and stated that he was getting a sum of Rs. 2,328/- per month as pension only, in the reply to the application for maintenance before the learned Trial Court. In view thereof the learned Mediator came to the conclusion that a sum of Rs. 800/- per month would be a fair amount as maintenance to the Respondent as agreed upon between the parties. Later the Respondent came to know that the Petitioner was in fact getting a sum of Rs. 5,183/- in August, 2005 and a sum of Rs. 7,326/- from the month of March, 2008. He had additional income from agriculture and in view of these facts the learned Trial Court committed no error in enhancing the maintenance.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. The brief facts giving rise to the filing of this petition are that the Respondent filed a petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance from 21st September, 2004 and in the said petition the Petitioner claimed that he was getting a sum of Rs. 2,328/- per month as pension. In the meantime, the Petitioner filed a petition for dissolution of marriage at Bhagalpur District on which the Respondent filed a petition for transfer before the Hon'ble Supreme Court to the Courts at Delhi. On 17th April, 2006 the Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to refer the matter to the Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts. The learned Mediator with the consent of the parties fixed a sum of Rs. 800/- per month as maintenance to be increased to Rs. 1,000/- per month w.e.f. 1st January, 2008. The Respondent later came to know that the Petitioner was getting a sum of Rs. 5,183/- in March, 2005 and a sum of Rs. 7,326/- from March, 2008 in addition to the agricultural income. It is in the light of these averments the learned Trial Court modified the maintenance and directed that the Respondent was entitled to 40% of the amount drawn by the Petitioner and thus directed the Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 2,130/- from August, 2005; Rs. 2,300/- from April, 2006; Rs. 2,630/- from January, 2007; Rs. 2,950/- from March, 2008; Rs. 3,250/- from September, 2009; Rs. 4,200/- from January, 2010 per month.

5. The moot question is whether an application u/s 127 Cr.P.C. would lie even in a case where the maintenance is settled between the parties by the process of mediation. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that a settlement arrived at mediation proceedings is final and binding in view of the amendment u/s 89 of the CPC. There is no dispute to this proposition. However, it is also well acknowledged that even during the process of mediation, specially for arriving at maintenance etc. the financial position of the parties has to b