1 2025:CGHC:23773 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 688 of 2025 1 - Janak Ram Yadav S/o Shri Jaldhar Yadav Aged About 33 Years Occupation - Business, R/o Sonumuda Amlibhouna Bajrang Para, Raigarh, Tah. And District- Raigarh (C.G.), Presently R/o Near Nathaldai Temple, Chandrapur, District- Sakti (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Lalita Yadav W/o Janak Ram Yadav Aged About 31 Years R/o Sonumuda Amlibhouna Bajrang Para, Raigarh, Tah. And District- Raigarh (C.G.), Presently R/o Village- Kotmi, Tah. And P.S. - Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.). 2 - Minor Ku Shaily Yadav D/o Janak Ram Yadav Aged About 7 Years Through Her Guardian Mother Smt. Lalita Yadav, R/o Sonumuda Amlibhouna Bajrang Para, Raigarh, Tah. And District- Raigarh (C.G.), Presently R/o Village- Kotmi, Tah. And P.S. - Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.). ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Advocate For Respondents : Not noticed Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 13/06/ 202 5 1. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2025, application for condonation of delay. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.06.16 10:30:21 +0530 2 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is poor villager and due to lack of legal knowledge delay of 3 days in filing the revision was occurred, therefore, the delay in filing the instant revision may kindly be condoned. 3. Upon due consideration, the application I.A. No. 01/2025 is allowed. Delay of 3 days is condoned. 4. The present revision has been filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the impugned order dated 06.03.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, link Sakti, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Case No. 68/2024, wherein amount of Rs. 4,000/- interim maintenance has been granted on an application filed by the respondents herein under Section 144 of BNSS, 2023. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submit that the interim maintenance of Rs.4,000/- granted by learned Family Court is on the higher side. It is further contended that the applicant is running a shop of tattoo and not earning as such and the parents and his son Is dependent upon him and the respondent/wife could not prove the cruelty and without any sufficient reason living separately, therefore, the order impugned is liable to be set aside in the interest of justice. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicant and perused the documents annexed with the revision 3 including the impugned order. 7. The respondent/wife herein had filed an application under Section 144 of BNSS before the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, link Sakti, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for grant of maintenance to Rs.5,000-5000 (total Rs.10,000) to her and her daughter. Learned judge after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record granted Rs.2,000-2000 (total Rs. 4000) towards maintenance in favour of the respondents vide impugned order dated 06.03.2025 passed in Case No. 68/2024. 8. Having carefully examined the impugned order, I find no perversity, illegality, or inconsistency in the findings recorded by the learned Judge as it is undisputed fact that respondent No. 1 is the legally wedded wife and respondent No. 2 is the daughter of the applicant and only Rs. 4000/- has been awarded as interim maintenance, hence, at this stage, I am not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. 9. Accordingly, the revision is hereby dismissed at motion stage itself. 10. However, the Family Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu