1 2025:CGHC:20029 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 433 of 2024 1 - Rahul Chhabra S/o Late Preetam Singh Chhabra Aged About 41 Years Proprietor - Hotel Siddhant And Chhabra Bichhayat Center, Tekriline, Sitabardi, Nagpur (Maharashtra) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Smt. Shipra Chhabra W/o Rahul Chhabra Aged About 29 Years Resident Of Lig- 15-16, Mansarowar Colony, Bhilai-3, Tahsil - Patan, District Durg (C.G.) 2 - Aanya Chhabra D/o Rahul Chhabra Aged About 12 Years Minor, Represented Through Mother Smt. Shipra Chhabra, Resident Of Lig-15-16, Mansarowar Colony, Bhilai-3, Tahsil - Patan, District Durg (C.G.) 3 - Gurman Chhabra S/o Rahul Chhabra Aged About 9 Years Minor, Represented Through Mother Smt. Shipra Chhabra, Resident Of Lig-15-16, Mansarowar Colony, Bhilai-3, Tahsil - Patan, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 01/05/2025 2 1. This Criminal Revision has been filed by the applicant/husband against the order dated 29-02-2024 passed by Learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, in Criminal Case No. 46/2019, whereby the application under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. filed by the respondents/wife and children has been partly allowed and the amount of maintenance earlier granted by the learned Family Court is enhanced. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1 is the wife of the applicant and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are their children. Since there was a dispute between the parties, they are residing separately. The respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are residing with their mother/respondent No.1. The respondents had filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for the grant of monthly maintenance amount to them before the learned Family Court, Durg, which was partly allowed on 15-04-2011 and the applicant/husband was directed to pay Rs. 2000/- per month to the respondent No.1/wife and Rs. 1500/- - 1500/- per month to each of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3/children. Considering the requirement of daily expenses as also the present cost of living and also that the order of maintenance has been passed in the year 2011, the respondents have filed an application under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. for enhancement/modification of maintenance amount granted earlier to them and claimed the enhancement of monthly maintenance amount to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- per month. In the application, the respondents have pleaded that the applicant is the owner of Siddhant Hotel and Chhabda Bichayat Kendra and earning sufficient amount. The respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are school-going children; a large amount is needed for their education. The father of the respondent No. 1 is a retired person, and they are facing financial hardship. The order of maintenance was passed since 9 years back, and therefore, the amount of maintenance should be enhanced suitably. 3 3. Replying to the application of the respondents, the applicant has denied the claim of the respondents and has submitted that the applicant is regularly paying the ordered amount of maintenance. There is no substantial change in the circumstances. There is no enhancement of the income of the applicant, and his financial status is the same as it has been previously; therefore, the application of the respondents is liable to be dismissed. 4. The learned Family Court has framed points for determination and proceeded for trial of the case. In support of the submissions, the respondent No.1 herself has been examined as AW-1, and the applicant himself has been examined as NAW-1. 5. After conclusion of the trial and hearing the parties, the learned Family Court has passed the order on 29-02-2024 and enhanced the maintenance amount earlier granted to the respondents from a total Rs. 5,000/- to a total Rs. 13000/- per month from the date of order i.e. dated 29-02-2024. This order is under challenge in the present revision petition. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the learned family court should have considered that the income of the applicant is not increased, and there is no change in circumstances. The applicant is regularly paying the maintenance amount of Rs. 5,000/- to the respondents, which is sufficient for them. The respondents have failed to establish the grounds for enhancement of the maintenance amount. The applicant is receiving Rs. 10,000/- per month from his hotel business as per the agreement settled between him and his brother, out of which he is paying the maintenance amount to the respondents. The amount awarded/enhanced by the learned family court is excessive and beyond the capacity of the applicant to pay to the respondents. The learned family court, without appreciating the evidence available on record in its proper perspective, altered the maintenance amount; therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4 7. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order annexed with the petition. 8. It is not in dispute that in the year 2011, a total amount of Rs. 5000/- was awarded in favour of the respondents who were the applicants in the case before the learned Family Court. The original order of maintenance was passed in the year 2011, and after about 8 years, the application for modification/enhancement of the maintenance amount has been filed by the respondents. The learned Family Court, after considering the monthly income of the applicant and admission made by him in his evidence that he is running the hotel along with his brother, which is in the name of the mother of the applicant and his brother Ritesh Chhabda. 9. The learned Family Court has also considered the present cost of living, cost of education to the children and other living expenses for which Rs. 5000/- per month for the respondents is a very meagre amount and, therefore, modified/enhanced the monthly maintenance amount. 10. The change of circumstances referred to in sub-Section 1 of Section 127 of Cr.P.C. is a comprehensive phrase and also includes the change of circumstances of the husband. The amount of maintenance once fixed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is not something which can be taken to be a blanket liability for all time to come. It is subject to variation on both sides. It can be increased or decreased as per the altered situation. Section 125 of Cr.P.C. was conceived to ameliorate the agony, anguish and financial suffering of a woman who is required to leave the matrimonial home, so that some considerable arrangements could be made to enable her to sustain herself and her children. She required a sufficient amount for need of day to day expenses. From the evidence produced by the parties, it appears that the applicant has sufficient means of his income. 11. It is well well-settled proposition of law that while considering the quantum of maintenance to wife and children, the court has to see the financial status of 5 both husband and wife, which they are enjoying, their family background, and the circumstances under which wife and children can survive. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down certain parameters in the case of “Rajnesh v. Neha”, 2021 (2) SCC 324, which are to be considered while granting the maintenance and its quantum. 12. The quantum of maintenance always lies with the discretion of the learned Family Court, and the said discretion cannot be interfered with, unless and until it is shown as arbitrary or capricious. The amount of Rs. 5,000/- awarded to the respondent No. 1/wife and Rs. 4,000/- - 4,000/- to both the children/respondents Nos. 2 and 3, (total Rs. 13,000/-) awarded by the learned Family Court in the impugned order dated 29-02-2024, based on proper appreciation of evidence, present cost of living, educational expenses of the children and living standard of the parties, which cannot be said to be exorbitant or excessive. 13. In view of the above, no infirmity or illegality is found in the impugned order, and therefore, the present criminal revision is dismissed at the motion hearing itself. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.06.03 11:23:43 +0530