Baljit Kaur vs Nirmal Singh on 27 September, 2017

CR No.4283 of 2015 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CR No.4283 of 2015
Date of Decision: 27.09.2017

Baljit Kaur ……Petitioner
Vs
Nirmal Singh …..Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

Present:Mr. Parminder Singh-I, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Ms. Jigyasa Tanwar, Advocate
for the respondent.
****

RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral)

[1]. Petitioner has assailed the order dated 15.05.2015

passed by Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Bathinda

whereby application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act

for grant of maintenance pendente lite was declined.

[2]. Petitioner filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu

Marriage Act for decree of divorce. An application under Section

24 of the Hindu Marriage Act was also filed claiming

maintenance pendente lite on the ground that respondent is

owner of 10 acres of agricultural land in village Dhatt, District

Ludhiana and he has sold one residential house recently for a

consideration of Rs.16,00,000/-. Petitioner claimed maintenance

pendente lite to the tune of Rs.20,000/- per month, besides

1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 30-09-2017 06:53:24 :::
CR No.4283 of 2015 2

litigation expenses of the equal amount.

[3]. The application was contested by the respondent.

[4]. The Court of Additional District Judge, Bathinda

declined the application vide the impugned order on the ground

that the respondent is about 75 years of age and no

documentary evidence has been placed on record in respect of

sale of Kothi for a consideration of Rs.16,00,000/- and

ownership of the land with the respondent.

[5]. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the

application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, a

specific plea was taken with regard to ownership of 10 acres of

land with the respondent and the relevant documents were

shown to the Court at the time of arguments on the application

in question.

[6]. A reply has been filed by the respondent in which a

specific stand has been taken in para No.8 of the reply that

share in the land had already been transferred orally by the

respondent in favour of his son in the month of May 2012 and

the said fact has been given effect in the revenue record as well.

[7]. At this stage, documents placed by the petitioner on

record would give necessary explanation in the remarks column

in the context of mutation No.4507 dated 10.06.2012. At this

2 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 30-09-2017 06:53:28 :::
CR No.4283 of 2015 3

stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw this

revision petition with a liberty to file fresh application under

Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for the period from

10.10.2014 i.e. the date on which divorce petition was filed to

07.09.2017 i.e. date on which the divorce petition was accepted

by the trial Court.

[8]. At this stage, without commenting anything on the

merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow the petitioner to

withdraw this revision petition with a liberty to file appropriate

application before the trial Court to explain her stand that the

necessary documents were submitted before the trial Court at

the time of arguments on the application under Section 24 of the

Hindu Marriage Act and to seek necessary orders therefrom.

[9]. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid.

September 27, 2017. (RAJ MOHAN SINGH)
Prince JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No

3 of 3
30-09-2017 06:53:28 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *