Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jagroop Singh vs Gurpreet Kaur And Anr on 3 February, 2016

Author: Shekher Dhawan

Bench: Shekher Dhawan

                  In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh



                                                Civil Revision No. 530 of 2016 (O&M)

                                                         Date of Decision: 03.02.2016


          Jagroop Singh
                                                                            ... Petitioner(s)

                                                   Versus

          Gurpreet Kaur and Another
                                                                         ... Respondent(s)

          CORAM:               Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shekher Dhawan.

          1.                   Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to
                               see judgment?
          2.                   To be referred to reporters or not?
          3.                   Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

          Present:             Mr. Gopal Singh Nahel, Advocate
                               for the petitioner(s).

          Shekher Dhawan, J.

Present petition is challenge to the order dated 30.11.2015, passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhuri, whereby respondent No.1-Gurpreet Kaur (wife of the petitioner) and respondent No.2-Navjot Singh (minor son of the petitioner) were held entitled to be paid interim maintenance allowance at the rate of ` 3,000/- per month and ` 2,000/- per month, respectively, from the date of filing of the application till final disposal of the case.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is not having any regular source of income and he is not in a position to make payment of interim maintenance allowance, which is on the DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2016.02.04 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Civil Revision No. 530 of 2016 (O&M) 2 higher side. So, the order dated 30.11.2015 be set aside.

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and the fact that relationship of respondent No.1 being wife of petitioner and respondent No.2 being minor son of the petitioner is not in dispute, present petition is certainly without any merit. Needless to say that now-a-days interim maintenance allowance to wife at the rate of ` 3,000/- per month and ` 2,000/- per month to minor son is bare minimum for survival. Petitioner, being able bodied person, is under legal and moral obligation to earn and maintain his legally wedded wife and minor son. As such, present petition is without any merit and the same stands dismissed.

(Shekher Dhawan) Judge February 3, 2016 "DK"

DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2016.02.04 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document