Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33189 (CHH)

SMT. SUSMITA DEB v. PHALGUNI DEB

CRMP/2188/2025 · 2025-07-14

Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:32830 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2188 of 2025 1 - Smt. Susmita Deb W/o Phalguni Deb, Aged About 44 Years, R/o 1689/8 Sector - 2 Jhanda Chowk Shivanand Nagar, P.S. Khamtarai District -Raipur (C.G.). ... Petitioner versus 1 - Phalguni Deb S/o Deepak Deb, Aged About 44 Years, Permanent R/o Flat No. 2-B Sudha Apartment 197, J.N. Bose Road Subhas Gram Near Railway Gate Post Kodalia P.S. Sonarpur Kolkata (W.B.) Pin Code - 700146 Aslo At Overlook At Bear Creek 800 E Ash Lane, Apartment - 2123 Euless Texas (U.S.) Zip Code - 76039 -4700. ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Advocate. For Respondent : Not noticed Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 15/07/ 2025 1. The present petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for modification/rectification of the order dated 12.06.2025 passed by this Court in CRR No. 665/2025. 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in paragraph 3 of the order dated 12.06.2025, it has been inadvertently recorded that the petitioner is earning Rs.82,000/- per month, whereas, the actual monthly income, as per the records of the SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.07.16 11:34:39 +0530 2 learned Family Court and the impugned order dated 20.03.2025 in MJC No. 229/2020, is Rs.62,000/- . Therefore, the petitioner seeks modification of the said order to reflect the correct income and further prays that the trial court be directed to expedite the trial proceedings as expeditiously as possible. 3. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and perused the documents annexed with the petition including the order sheets of the Trial Court. 4. In the order of this Court dated 12.06.2025 in CRR No. 665/2025 at para 3, due to typographical error, the monthly income of the petitioner was inadvertently typed as Rs.82,000/- instead of Rs.62,000/-, therefore, the month income of the petitioner be read as Rs.62,000/-. Furthermore, as per the trial Court’s order-sheet dated 20.03.2025, the case before the Family Court was first listed for non-applicant evidence on 26.09.2023, about 02 years ago. This Court, in its order dated 12.06.2025, had directed the trial Court to expedite the trial. In addition to the said direction, it is hereby further directed that the trial Court shall expedite the trial as early as possible, preferably within a period of 03 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. With the above observations/direction, this petition stands finally dispose off at the admission stage itself. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.