1 2025:CGHC:17756 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 476 of 2025 Rita @ Ritu W/o Ganesh Rajput Aged About 40 Years R/o Saraswati Colony Communication Building Near D.L.S. College, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus Ganesh Rajput @ Ganesh Bahadur S/o Nageshwar Singh Thakur Aged About 46 Years R/o Near Railway Cabin Fatak, Belgahana, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Ms. Vijay Laxmi Soni, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 17/04/2025 Heard on admission. 1. The present revision petition under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 24.02.2025, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, in MJC No. 7 of 2023, whereby the learned Family Court has enhanced/altered the maintenance amount granted to the petitioner from Rs. 3,000/- to Rs. 4,000/- per month. VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.04.21 19:08:03 +0530 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is praying for one-time settlement of maintenance amount or the maintenance amount may be enhanced as the learned Family Court has not exercised its discretion in accordance with law and only granted Rs. 4,000/- per month. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the order impugned annexed with the present criminal revision. 4. From perusal of the present criminal revision, it appears that on the basis of a compromise and settlement arrived at between the parties, the learned Family Court has passed the order on 24.02.2025 and enhanced/altered the monthly maintenance amount granted to the petitioner from Rs. 3,000/- to Rs. 4,000/-. Since the order has been passed on the basis of compromise and further, except the order impugned, no other document has been annexed by the petitioner along with the present petition. I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order or to grant any relief to the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved