SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Azad Singh vs Pooja on 5 December, 2018

210
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

FAO No. 6370 of 2015 (OM)
Date of Decision: 05.12.2018

AZAD SINGH …… Appellant
V/s.
POOJA ….Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL.

Present: Mr. Gurpreet Jaiya, Advocate
for the appellant.

Ms. Bindu Goel, Advocate,
for the respondent.

****

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (Oral)

Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that vide order

dated 11.12.2017, her application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was allowed and

appellant was ordered to pay maintenance pendente lite @ `7,000/- per

month with effect from the date of the application i.e June, 2017 and the

litigation expenses of `40,000/-. Thereafter, the case was adjourned for

19.03.2018 for payment of the entire arrears of maintenance pendente lite. On

the date fixed, an adjournment was sought by the learned counsel for the

appellant to clear the arrears of maintenance and the matter was adjourned to

10.07.2018 subject to payment of `2,000/- as cost. Thereafter, the case was

listed for 10.07.2018 and on that date also arrears of maintenance was not

paid and the following order was passed: –

“For payment of the arrears of maintenance, adjourned to
23.07.2018.

In case, the entire arrears are not cleared on the said date, the
said inaction may entail adverse legal consequences against the
husband-appellant.”

1 of 2
06-01-2019 20:49:29 :::
FAO No. 6370 of 2015 (OM) Page 2 of 2

Thereafter, on 23.07.2018, the case was adjourned for today.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that he has no

instructions at all in regard to the payment of arrears of maintenance

pendente lite, therefore, learned counsel for the respondent has prayed that

the defence of the appellant may be struck off.

After taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and

circumstances, the defence of the appellant is hereby struck off. In such a

situation, where the divorce petition was filed by the husband under Section

13 (1) (i) of the Act which was dismissed by the trial Court vide judgment

and decreed dated 20.08.2015 and the present appeal has been preferred by

the husband, in the event of striking of the defence of the appellant-husband,

the present appeal would also meet with the same fate of dismissal.

Ordered accordingly.

It is needless to mention that still the respondent-wife may avail

the remedy, if available, for the purpose of recovery of amount of

maintenance.

[ RAKESH KUMAR JAIN]
JUDGE

December 5, 2018 [ ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL]
Ess Kay JUDGE

Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes / No

Whether Reportable : Yes / No

2 of 2
06-01-2019 20:49:29 :::

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