1 2025:CGHC:29233 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 778 of 2025 Ajay Goel S/o K.C. Goel Aged About 43 Years R/o Flat No. 414, Second Floor Block No. 18, Housing Board Colony, Khamardih, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Suman Goel W/o Ajay Goel Aged About 41 Years R/o House No. 6 Basant Vihar Colony, Near Shiv Mandir, Mahavir Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Karitik Goel S/o Ajay Goel Aged About 15 Years R/o House No. 6 Basant Vihar Colony, Near Shiv Mandir, Mahavir Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Minor) Represented Through His Mother Namely Suman Goel Res. No. 1 ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Rajesh Jain, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30.06.2025 1. I.A. No.1 of 2025 is an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the present revision of 104 days. 2. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the revision is hereby condoned. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 3. By way of this revision, the applicant has prayed for following relief: “It is therefore, respectfully prayed that this Court may kindly be pleased to allow this application and set-aside the order dated 03.12.2024 passed in Criminal M.C.C No. 921/2024 (Annexure A-1) and remit back matter for fresh decide with giving sufficient opportunity to the applicant to defend himself.” 4. Brief facts of the case are that the non-applicant No. 01/wife, has submitted that her marriage with the applicant was solemnized on 15.12.2006 as per Hindu customs and rituals at Arya Samaj Mandir, Baijnath Para, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. From their marital relationship, a son named Kartik Goyal was born, who is presently residing with her. After 15–20 days of the marriage, the applicant started quarrelling with her over petty issues. In the year 2008, the marriage of her brother-in-law took place and all the arrangements for the wedding were made by the non-applicant No.1. However, during the wedding, she was humiliated in front of all relatives by the applicant and his family members. Even after the marriage of her brother-in- law, all household chores were forced upon her, and whenever she requested her sister-in-law for help, the applicant and his brother abused her, saying, “Were you brought here to make others work? Don’t forget your place and why you came to this house.”The non- applicant No.1 further states that even during her pregnancy, neither the applicant nor his family members took care of her, and she was made to do all the household work. After the birth of her son, no 3 support of any kind was provided by the applicant or his family members. The applicant used to consume alcohol and physically abuse her even in front of their son. Despite being financially capable, the applicant never fulfilled their basic needs, nor did he provide for the child’s education or daily requirements from the time of birth until now. To meet her and her son’s basic needs, the non- applicant No.1 started working by supplying tiffins and doing tailoring work. During this period, she also completed her M.Com, B.Ed., and M.A. degrees. The applicant used to doubt her character whenever she stepped out of the house and would create disputes over phone calls. Despite such behavior by the applicant, the non-applicant No.1 tried her best to save the marriage, hoping that his behavior might change in the future. However, there was no change in the applicant’s conduct. The non-applicants further states that in March 2023, the applicant refused to live with her and to continue the marital relationship. He also disowned any responsibility towards their son, saying, “Take care of yourself and your son on your own. If you need anything, get it from your maternal home. Don’t bother me.” Since March 2023 till date, the applicant has not provided any maintenance to the non-applicant or their son. The applicant is a businessman and earns approximately ₹80,000/- (eighty thousand rupees) per month. The non-applicant has no independent source of income, due to which she is facing severe difficulties in raising and supporting her son. Hence, she has prayed for a monthly maintenance amount of 4 ₹40,000/- (forty thousand rupees) from the non-applicant for herself and her son. 5. The leaned Family Court order to issued notice to the applicant herein on 30-08-2024 for his appearance on 18-10-2024. According to service report notice served upon brother of the applicant. That on said date, applicant not appeared before the court then court proceeded Ex-party proceedings against the present applicant and fixed matter for evidence of non-applicants herein. 6. After framing the issues and considering the evidence adduced by the non-applicants, the learned Family Court, vide order dated 03.12.2024, partly allowed the claim of non-applicant No. 1 and 2, granted maintenance of ₹4000/- per month to the non-applicant No.1 and Rs. 8,000/- per month to the non-applicant No.2 (total 12,000/-) and further order to bear Rs. 2000/- for the proceedings expenses. Hence, the present revision petition. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Family Court should have seen the notice issued to the applicant is not served upon him and acceding to the service report notice serve upon brother of the applicant herein, not upon the applicant herein. He further submits that the applicant doing job in D.S. DUCTOFAB SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. 11-B, VILL. ISMALA, SAMPLA BERI ROAD, THE SAMPLA, ROHATAK (HARYANA) and getting salary Rs. 16000/- per months and his old father, mother and younger brother also dependent upon him. The learned Family Court should have seen on 18.10.2024 when the ex-parte order have been passed non- applicants herein is also not present in the Court, therefore, it would 5 be appropriate to dismissed the suit itself on want of prosecution and the learned family Court awarded hire side of maintenance amount, which could liable to be reduced. He further submits that the learned Family Court should have seen that the non-applicant No.1 doing job of teacher and she is well educated lady and she herself leave house of the applicant on her will, the applicant ready to live along with non- applicants and the applicant has no knowledge about the filling of the maintenance application by the non-applicants and no notice served upon him. Therefore, he prays that the impugned order is liable to be set-aside and remit back the matter for fresh decide. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with revision. 9. From perusal of the order dated 03.12.2024, it appears that the applicant has filed the present revision against the ex-parte order passed by the learned Family Court, whereby maintenance of Rs. 4,000/- per month was awarded to Non-applicant No.1 (wife) and Rs. 8,000/- per month to Non-applicant No.2 (son). Without availing the remedy before the Family Court to set aside the ex-parte order, the applicant has directly approached this Court for setting aside the ex- parte order passed by the learned Family Court. 10. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants and also considering the finding recorded by the learned Family Court, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court concerned. 11. Accordingly, the revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. The applicant is at liberty to move an 6 appropriate application before the family Court concerned if so advised. 12. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal