A wife can claim maintenance under different statutes, and the court must consider previous maintenance awards when determining the quantum of maintenance in subsequent proceedings.

ORDER :

CM No. 6007/2023

1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the revision petition against the order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jammu, whereby in a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C., interim maintenance has been granted in favour of the respondent. It has been submitted that after obtaining certified copy of the impugned order, the petitioner filed a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing CRM(M) No. 767/2023 challenging the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court and during the course of the hearing of the said petition, it was realized by the petitioner that the petition is not maintainable, as in terms of provisions of the Family Courts Act, the order in question is revisable in nature. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to avail appropriate remedy. This was done in terms of order dated 06.09.2023 passed by this Court. According to the petitioner, the period between 02.09.2023 to 06.09.2023 during which he was prosecuting the petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. under bona fide mistaken belief deserves to be excluded, while computing the period of limitation. It has been further submitted that the petitioner consumed time in obtaining the copies of court orders and collecting the documents which resulted in further delay in filing of the revision petition. On these grounds, the condonation of delay in filing the revision petition is being sought by the petitioner.

2. No reply has been filed by the respondent, therefore, the averments made in the application have remained unrebutted.

3. For reasons stated in the application as have been narrated hereinbefore, sufficient cause is made out for condoning the delay of 28 days in filing the revision petition. The application is, accordingly, allowed and delay in filing the revision petition is condoned.

4. The application stands disposed of.

Cr Rev. No. 48/2023

5. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jammu, whereby in a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent against the petitioner, a sum of Rs. 3000/- per month has been awarded as interim maintenance in favour of the respondent. The revision petition has been filed in terms of Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. The proceedings being criminal in nature, the petition should have been given the nomenclature of criminal revision petition, but the Registry has wrongly given it nomenclature of civil revision petition. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to assign appropriate nomenclature to the instant petition.

6. The petitioner has assailed the order of the Family Court on the grounds that the prior to the filing of petition under section 125 Cr.P.C. by the respondent against the petitioner, she had filed an application under Section 12 of the J&K Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005(for short the DV Act) before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (Munsiff), Jammu and vide order dated 07.09.2019 interim maintenance of Rs. 5000/- per month has been granted in favour of the respondent. It has been further submitted that the learned Family Court without taking into consideration the aforesaid aspect of the matter passed the impugned order, which according to the petitioner, is illegal. It has been further submitted that the petitioner cannot be made to pay interim maintenance to the respondent in two different proceedings at the same time. According to the petitioner, he is a disabled pensioner drawing a monthly pension of Rs. 40,000/- and he has to support two children, who were presently undergoing studies. In these circumstances, grant of maintenance by the learned Family Court in favour of the respondent and against the petitioner is working harshly against him. It has been further submitted that the respondent is drawing a salary of Rs. 15000/- by working on a garm