JUDGMENT AND ORDER : 1. Heard Ms. S. Deb Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 56/14 and for the respondent in Case No. Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 72/14 and Mr. R. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Case No. Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 72/14 and for the respondents in Case No. Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 56/14. 2. Both these petitions arise from the same judgment and order dated 30.06.2014 delivered by the Judge, Family Court, Udaipur, South Tripura in Cr. Misc./FC/UDP/9/2008. 3. The grievance expressed by the petitioner in Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 56/14 is that the direction to pay arrear of maintenance with effect from 08.02.2008 in 25 equal installments along with regular maintenance allowance is not only harsh but unreasonable and unsustainable in the context of the case. 4. Mr. R. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in case No. Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 72/14 and for the respondent in case No. Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 56/14 has on the contrary submitted that the quantum of maintenance as has been determined by the Judge, Family Court, is too inadequate to lead even a modest livelihood. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel has further submitted that the respondent, the petitioner in Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 56/14 is a rifleman working under the Tripura State Rifles and after deduction he is drawing a sum of Rs. 15,922/- p.m. as salary. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel has not missed to add that this salary after deduction is of the year 2015. In the meanwhile in all likelihood, it has increased. 5. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel has further submitted that daughter of the petitioner in Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 56/14, namely Sristi Mandal, the petitioner No. 2 in Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 72/14 is prosecuting her studies in an English Medium School. Such education is afforded as the cost is borne exclusively by the petitioner No. 1 of Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 72/14. As such, the maintenance of Rs. 1,500/- for the petitioner No. 1 and Rs. 2000/- for the petitioner No. 2 is inadequate. It requires enhancement having due regard to the income and the status and requirement of the said petitioners. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this court finds that the impugned judgment and order dated 30.06.2014 requires some interference. 1,500/- for the petitioner No. 1 and Rs. 2000/- for the petitioner No. 2 is inadequate. It requires enhancement having due regard to the income and the status and requirement of the said petitioners. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this court finds that the impugned judgment and order dated 30.06.2014 requires some interference. The petitioner No. 1 namely, Smt. Anjana Dey (Mandal) would get a sum of Rs. 2,500/- pm and the petitioner No. 2 namely Sristi Mandal would get a sum of Rs. 3000/- pm. In total, the respondent husband namely Subal Mandal shall pay a sum of Rs. 5,500/- pm and that amount shall be paid within 7th day of every calendar month with effect from 01.09.2016. So far the arrear maintenance is concerned, the respondent-husband shall pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- in lump-sum in 10 (ten) equal installments per month starting from the month of November, 2016 and payable in the month of December, 2016. 7. Ms. S. Deb Gupta, learned counsel has pointed out that in terms of the order of the court, the respondent has paid a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the petitioner No. 1 on account of arrear maintenance. The said amount shall not be deducted or adjusted as the direction of the family court was to pay the maintenance allowance from 08.02.2008. This court has relaxed that liability considerably. 8. With these observation and direction, these petitions are allowed or modified to the extent as indicated above. 9. There shall be no further order. 10. The maintenance allowance and the arrear as above shall be sent to the petitioner No. 1 in Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 72/14 in the following address: Smt. Anjana Dey (Mandal) W/o Sri Subal Mandal, care of Sri Salindra Kr. Dey, West Bank of Dhanisagar Dighi, P.O. & P.S. R.K. Pur, Udaipur, South Tripura 11. If, Smt. Anjana Dey (Mandal) furnished any Bank Account Number, the respondent shall be permitted to remit the maintenance allowance to the said account. In the event, if the maintenance allowance is sent by the Money Order the commission of the Money Order shall be borne by the respondent-husband, namely Sri Subal Mandal.