SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 12215

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
P.VELMURUGAN, J
Deepa Rajendran – Appellant
Versus
Unnikrishnan – Respondent
Crl.RC.No.1768 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.G.Mani Prabhu
For the Respondents: Mr.R.Thenmozhi

No substantial change in circumstances for maintenance enhancement under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

Headnote:The case discusses the maintenance petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by a wife against her husband, seeking enhancement from an initial amount set by the Family Court. The court found no substantial change in circumstances to warrant an increase in maintenance. The court affirmed the prior ruling's fairness, reiterating the need for reasonable maintenance aligned with the parties’ economic status. Thus, the application for revision is dismissed based on prior confirmations.

Table of Content
1. filing maintenance petition under cr.p.c. (Para 2 , 3 , 6 , 7)
2. assessment of maintenance based on economic status. (Para 4 , 5 , 8)

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner to to set aside the order passed on 25.11.2022 in M.C.No.348 of 2013 on the file of Vth Additional Family Court, Chennai.

2. The petitioner/estranged wife of the respondent filed a maintenance petition in M.C.No.348 of 2013 on the file of Vth Additional Family Court, Chennai seeking maintenance for herself and minor son. The Family Court, by order dated 25.11.2022, partly allowed the petition directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month to the petitioner and a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month to the minor son, in total Rs.55,000/- per month as maintenance. Aggrieved by the order of maintenance, the petitioner has filed the present revision seeking enhancement of maintenance. Since the minor son attained majority, he is not a party to the present revision.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent is earning more than Rs.1 Crore and even at the time of filing of the maintenance case, he was earning around Rs.2,50,000/- per month, but the learned Magistrate failed to consider the said fact. He also submitted that the respondent filed a petition for divorce in O.P.No.1343 of 2014 before the Family Court and the same was allowed by order dated 25.11.2022 and challenging the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Division Bench of this Court in C.M.A. No.156 of 2023 and the Division Bench by judgment dated 07.04.2023, set aside the judgment and decree passed in O.P.No.1343 of 2014 and remanded the matter back to the Family Court for fresh consideration after affording sufficient opportunities to both parties and now the same is pending for orders. However, since the petitioner is not having any means to maintain herself, she is entitled to get maintenance on par with the respondent/husband and since the maintenance amount ordered by the Family Court is very meagre and not sufficient to maintain herself, the petitioner has filed the present revision seeking enhancement of maintenance.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent/husband filed a petition before the Family Court for divorce on the ground of cruelty. Though the same was allowed, the petitioner challenged the same and the Division Bench of this Court set aside the decree of divorce and remanded the matter back to the Family Court for fresh consideration and the same is pending for orders. He further submitted that challenging the order of maintenance passed by the Family Court in M.C.No.348 of 2013 dated 25.11.2022, the respondent filed a revision before this Court in Crl.R.C.No.941 of 2024, but the same was disposed of by order dated 10.06.2024 confirming the order passed by the Family Court. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present revision. He would submit that this Court observed that considering the scope and object of Section 125 Cr.P.C., the order passed by the Judge, Family Court is confirmed. Therefore, there is no special reason or change in circumstances produced by the petitioner for enhancement of maintenance. Hence, this revision has to be dismissed and the order passed by this Court in Crl.R.C.No.941 of 2024 dated 10.06.2024 to be confirmed.

5. Heard and perused the materials available on record.

6. Admittedly, the petitioner is wife and the respondent is husband.

Before the Family Court, the respondent filed a petition for divorce in O.P.No.1343 of 2014 and the petitioner filed a maintenance case in M.C.No.348 of 2013 and both the cases were taken together by the Judge, Family Court and common order was passed by order dated 25.11.2022 and that the O.P. filed by the respondent/husband was allowed and the maintenance case filed by the petitioner/wife was partly allowed.

7. Aggrieved by the order of maintenance, the petitioner has filed the present revision see

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top