SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ajit Kumar vs Smt. Vibha Singh on 16 May, 2018

Patna High Court C.M isc. No.1832 of 2017 (2) dt.16-05-2018
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1832 of 2017

1. Ajit Kumar, S/o Prof. Maan Singh, resident of Uttari Dahiyawan Tola,
P.O./ P.S. Chapra Nagar, District- Saran.

…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Smt. Vibha Singh, Wife of Ajit Kumar, resident of Uttari Dahiyawan
Tola, P.O. P.S. Chhapra Nagar, District- Saran., Daughter of Sri Suresh
Chandra Singh, presently residing at Sector- 12/C, Quarter no. 3810, ‘CD’
Type, Bokaro Steel, City, Jharkhand.

…. …. Respondent/s

Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kishore Kumar Sinha
For the Respondent/s : Mr.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR
JHA
ORAL ORDER

2 16-05-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner filed this civil miscellaneous petition

against the order dated 23.08.2017 passed by Principal Judge,

Family Court, Saran at Chhapra in Divorce Case No.177 of 2015

by which the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,000

per month to his wife as maintenance pendente lite and expenses

of the proceeding.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there

is no definite source of income of the petitioner. The wife of the

petitioner is living in Bokaro and the petitioner has come to know

that she is employed in a coaching institute. It is further submitted

that petitioner filed divorce case alleging that his wife was
Patna High Court C.M isc. No.1832 of 2017 (2) dt.16-05-2018
2

mentally ill and concealing this fact, the marriage was solemnized.

There is no chance of living with such mental insane person.

Taking into consideration the facts that the petitioner

himself stated that his wife is mentally insane and she is not able

to live a happy conjugal life but she is living in her parents’ house,

I find that the learned Principal Judge has rightly allowed the

petition of ad interim maintenance and directed the petitioner to

give Rs.4,000/- as maintenance and litigation cost. The litigation

cost has not yet been quantified as it appears from the order.

Rs.4,000/-, the amount which has been granted as maintenance,

appears to be reasonable and just, therefore, I do not find any

reason to interfere with the impugned order.

Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous petition is

dismissed. The petitioner shall keep on paying Rs.4,000/- as

maintenance to his wife.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
Saurabh/-

U

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation