1 2025:CGHC:3573 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 39 of 2023 Lalit Verma S/o. Kaushal Verma Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Lolesara (Kewachhi), P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) versus 1 - Pooja Verma W/o Lalit Verma Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Lolesara Kewachhi, P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) Present Address-Ward No. 21, Sirwabandha Road, Bemetara, P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) 2 - Shreya Verma W/o Lalit Verma Aged About 6 Years Minor Through The Legal Guardian Mother Pooja Verma, W/o Lalit Verma, R/o Village Lolesara Kewachhi, P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) Present Address-Ward No. 21, Sirwabandha Road, Bemetara, P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) --- Non-applicant(s) CRR No. 838 of 2023 1 - Pooja Varma W/o Shri Lalit Verma Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Lolesara, Kewachhi, P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) At Present R/o Ward No.21, Sirwabandha Road, Bemetara P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) 2 - Shreya Verma D/o Shri Lalit Verma, Aged About 06 Month, Through Legal Guardian Mother Pooja Verma W/o Shri Lalit Verma, R/o Village Lolesara, Kewachhi, P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) At Present R/o Ward No.21, Sirwabandha Road, Bemetara P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) ---Applicant(s) KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Versus Lalit Verma S/o Shri Kaushal Verma Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Lolesara, Kewachhi, P.S. Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant :Mr. Suresh Kumar Verma, Adv. in CRR No.39/2023 For Non-applicant :None in CRR No. 8/2017 And For Applicant :None in CRR No.838/2023. For Non-applicant :Mr. Suresh Kumar Verma, Adv. in CRR No.838/2023 Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24/07/2025 1. Since the aforesaid two criminal revisions have been filed against the same order, they are being decided of by this common order. 2. In CRR No. 838/2023, I.A. No.1 of 2023 is an application for condonation of delay in filing the revision of 154 days. 3. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the revision is hereby condoned. 4. In the present case, an application for maintenance was filed on behalf of the wife and daughter namely Smt. Pooja Verma and Minor Shreya Verma. The learned Family Court, Bemetara, District Bemetara, vide order dated 16.11.2022, granted a monthly maintenance amount of ₹7000/- to the wife, Pooja and Rs. 3000/- to the daughter, Shreya. Being aggrieved by the said order, both parties preferred criminal revision petitions. The wife, Pooja, filed Criminal Revision No. 838/2023, contending that the amount awarded is inadequate, unjust, and does not 3 meet the rising cost of living; hence, it deserves to be enhanced suitably. On the other hand, the husband, Lalit Verma, filed Criminal Revision No. 39/2023, asserting that the amount awarded is excessive and beyond his financial capacity, and therefore, the same deserves to be reduced. 5. Mr. Suresh Kumar Verma, learned counsel appearing for husband Lalit Verma, would submit that the husband has denied all the allegation levelled by the wife against him and has submits that the learned Family Court has without seen the record and without seen the documents, passed the order of maintenance Rs. 7000/-per month in favour of wife and and Rs. 3000/-per month in favour of daughter total 10,000/- maintenance which is contrary to law. He further submits that his wife is living separately without any reason therefore, the maintenance amount is so high because his wife is living with her parents and they have 5 acre 70 dismal agriculture land, therefore the order passed by the learned Family Court kindly be set-aside. He further submits that the maintenance amount deserves to be modified/reduced suitably and amount of maintenance of Rs.10000/- per month payable to wife and daughter is not reasonable and fair, therefore, his revision deserves to be allowed and revision filed by wife and daughter deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of husband and gone through the record with utmost circumspection. 7. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that an application was filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. by the wife along with daughter before the learned Family Court concerned for grant of maintenance and after appreciating the evidence and documents available on record, the learned Family Court passed the order dated 16.11.2022, whereby it was 4 directed the husband to pay Rs. 7000/- per month towards maintenance to wife and Rs. 3000/- per month to the daughter, total 10,000/- and further order to bear Rs. 1000/- for the expenses of the proceedings. Being aggrieved by the said order, both parties preferred criminal revision petitions. The wife, Pooja, filed Criminal Revision No. 838/2023, contending that the amount awarded is inadequate, unjust, and does not meet the rising cost of living; hence, it deserves to be enhanced suitably. On the other hand, the husband, Lalit Verma, filed Criminal Revision No. 39/2023, asserting that the amount awarded is excessive and beyond his financial capacity, and therefore, the same deserves to be reduced. 8. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant/husband, perusing the documents appended with revisions and finding recorded by learned Family Court while awarding the maintenance of Rs. 7000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs. 3000/- per month in favour of daughter. I am of the considered view that the learned Family Court has not committed any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 9. For the foregoing reasons, both the revisions deserve to and are accordingly dismissed. 10.Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit the original records of revisions, in which it is available, to the concerned Family Court within a week from today for necessary information and follow up action. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal