Maintenance orders are treated as money decrees. Revisional courts must balance the economic independence and earning potential of parties against their statutory support obligations, ensuring that any challenge to the quantum of maintenance is substantiated by evidence or through adequate financial security measures regarding the award in dispute.

Order No. 1.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner was heard at some length.

2. The husband in the marriage is before this Court by filing the application under section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 challenging the judgment dated 24.10.2025 in Criminal Proceeding No. 212 of 2023 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhadrak.

The said criminal proceeding No. 212 of 2023 was filed by the wife in the marriage along with two minor children born from the wedlock; daughter aged about 14 years and son aged about 10 years seeking monthly maintenance under section 125 of Cr.P.C. (since repealed and substituted by pari materia provision contained in section 144 of the BNSS, 2023).

The application by the wife and children was favoured and the judgment is under challenge. However, instead of granting ₹50,000/- per month as maintenance for the wife-mother and two children, an amount of ₹7,000/- has been awarded to children petitioner nos.2 & 3 and the wife has been awarded a monthly maintenance of ₹5,000/-, total amount coming to ₹19,000/-.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner, the wife is reach and affluent. She owns petrol pump running.

4. The submissions made before this Court being matters of evidence and pleadings, the learned counsel was requested to refer to the pleadings before the learned Judge, Family Court where such stand was taken. She was also requested to refer to the evidence that was produced before the learned Judge, Family Court to support the contentions those are made in the present application by the opposite party-husband petitioner in this case.

5. In response to the above queries, which are most pertinent for present adjudication learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she does not have the copy of the objection/written statement of the opposite party before the learned Judge, Family Court.

However, learned counsel submits that the wife has admitted her income in the affidavit furnished in terms of the decision in Rajnesh v. Neha and another¹AIR 2021 SC 569 : 2020 INSC 631 : (2021) 2 SCC 324.

Learned counsel further refers to affidavit which has been annexed to the present revision application marked as Annexure-1 paragraph-F internal page-5. The paragraph ‘F’ is reproduced herein :

“F. Assets (movable and Immovable) owned by the Deponent

1. Self-acquired property, if any: Nil

2. Properties jointly owned by the parties after marriage: Nil

3. Share in any ancestral property: Nill

4. Other joint properties of the party's accounts/investments/FDR/mutual funds, stocks, debentures etc.), their value and status of possession: Nil

5. Status of possession of immovable property and details of rent, if leased:Yes

(One petrol pump name & style AS MALICK FILLING STATION situated at Durgapali in the dist sambalpur, but it is basing upon lease the land in favour of me by my father-in-aw after lease I have executed a sublease agreement in favour of Hindustan Petrolium Ltd by expenses more than rupees Rs 40,00,000/-(forty lakhs only) from landing basis from my father's house and relative for this amount my mother sold her maternal property more than 4 acres at Dhamara which area belongs to my mother's maternal house, but all profit & loss bears by my father-in-law Khirod Ch. Malick and Debabdbratt Malick from the year 2012 to till date)

6. Details of loans taken or given by the Deponent:- Yes (details loan taken by the deponent on which time my father-in-law Khirod Ch, Malick and my husband Debabratt Malick were in j