The State Of Bihar v. TRIVEDI

The State Of Bihar 2. Prabhavati Devi W/O Jitendra Singh, D/O Sri Ram Sakal Thakur Resident Of Village- Chiutaha, Police Station- Kotwa, District- East Champaran 3. Solu Kumar Minor Son Of Jitendra Singh Under The Guardianship Of Her Mother Prabhavati Devi (Opp. Party No. 2) Resident Of Village- Chiutaha, Police Station- Kotwa, District- East Champaran .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : M/S.G.Arun & Rakesh Ranjan, Advs. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Arif, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 3 25-11-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional P.P. Gone through the order impugned. Contrary to his own conduct, the learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the order impugned on the ground that the learned Lower Court without any evidence has assessed and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.3,000/- per month in lieu of maintenance to the Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3 who are non-else than admitted spouses as well as minor son. From para-8 of the judgment, it is apparent that deposing as Opposite Party Witness No.1, petitioner/husband failed to disclose his source of income as well Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1379 of 2011 (3) dt.25-11-2013 2 as quantum of maintenance. In terms of 106 of the Evidence Act, the aforesaid issue being exclusively within his knowledge was expected to have been properly placed before the court. Having concealment at his end is a matter of concern and that cannot be accepted by having a mincingly disclosure at the end of other witnesses so examined on his behalf. Therefore, directing the petitioner to pay Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife and children did not require interference. Petition is rejected. (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) B.Kr./-