Revisional Court Cannot Set Aside Findings Of Facts Recorded By Lower Court And Substitute Its Own Findings: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court on Monday reiterated that the revisional Court has no jurisdiction to set aside the findings of facts recorded by a subordinate Court and substitute its own findings.A single bench of Justice Juvvadi Sridevi said revisional Court has to confine itself to the legality and propriety of the findings of the subordinate Court as to whether the subordinate Court acted...
The Telangana High Court on Monday reiterated that the revisional Court has no jurisdiction to set aside the findings of facts recorded by a subordinate Court and substitute its own findings.
A single bench of Justice Juvvadi Sridevi said revisional Court has to confine itself to the legality and propriety of the findings of the subordinate Court as to whether the subordinate Court acted within its jurisdiction.
“Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. confer only limited power on the revisional Court to the extent of satisfying about the legality, propriety or regularity of the proceedings or orders of the lower Court and not to act like appellate Court for other purposes including the recording of new findings of fact on fresh appraisal of evidence”.
The bench was hearing a criminal revision case filed by the petitioner-husband challenging the order of the Family Court which enhanced the maintenance amount on a petition filed filed by his wife and minor children in 2018 under Section 127 CrPC.
The family court enhanced the maintenance ordered in 2010, from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent wife and Rs.5,000/- per month each to two respondents minor children.
The counsel for petitioner husband argued that he has entered into a settlement before Lok Adalat and it was agreed by the respondent wife that the petitioner will pay Rs.5000/- to respondent wife and each minor children and there is no change of circumstances to enhance the amount therefore the family court erred in altering the maintenance.
The counsel for respondent wife and minor children submitted that the standard of living has increased therefore the court has rightly enhanced the maintenance amount. The husband has a well paying job and respondent has no means of livelihood to maintain herself and children. Therefore the order under challenge does not suffer from illegality.
In the light of the above contentions, the question which came before the court for consideration was whether the order of Family Court suffers from illegality, impropriety or irregularity, so as to interfere with the same in exercise of powers under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC.
After hearing both the parties the High Court decided that it is a fit case to enhance the maintenance as there is a hike in cost of living from 2010 to 2018. The court explained that it is well settled law that the revisional Court cannot set aside the findings of facts.
The court found that in the present case there is no illegality or impropriety so as to interfere with the same by exercising revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C.
Case: Azmeera Jagan v State of Telangana
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Tel) 10
Bench: Justice Juvvadi Sridevi