SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Chandan Kumar vs Guriya Devi on 18 October, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.582 of 2019

Chandan Kumar, S/o Pramod Kumar Singh @ Pramod Singh, aged about 29
years, resident of Mohalla- Par Nawada Neem Tola Behind Church, P.S.-

District-Nawada. … … Petitioner
Versus

Guriya Devi, W/o Chandan Kumar, Resident of Mohalla-resident of Mohalla-
Par Nawada Neem Tola Behind Church, P.S.-District-Nawada, At Present D/o
Dayanand Prasad Singh, resident of Village- Sakrama, P.S.-Asthama, District-
Nalanda
… … Opposite Party

Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Krishna Deo Raj-Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mr.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT

18-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. This application under SectionArticle 227 of the

Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for setting

aside the order dated 22.02.2019 passed by the learned Principal

Judge, Family Court, Nawada in Matrimonial Case No.140 of

2018 by which he has allowed the application filed by the

opposite party under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act,

1955 and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.10,000/- per month as

maintenance pendente lite and Rs.1,000/- per month as litigation

cost to the opposite party from 11.10.2018 regularly by Rs.10th

of every month.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submitted that the order impugned passed by the learned

Principal Judge is bad in law as also on facts. He has submitted
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.582 of 2019 dt.18-10-2019
2/3

that the learned Principal Judge has failed to appreciate that for

no justifiable reason, the opposite party has refused to live with

the petitioner. He has also failed to appreciate that as a matter

fact that it is the petitioner, who is being subjected to cruelty by

the opposite party. She has deliberately deserted her matrimonial

house. Hence, she is not entitled for pendente lite maintenance

allowance.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and perused the materials on record, I find that the

opposite party had filed Mahila (Bihar) P. S. Case No.136 of

2016 against the petitioner for the offences punishable under

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and Section4 of

the Dowry Prohibition Act for harassing and humiliating her due

to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry.

5. The petitioner has not denied his relationship

with the opposite party. It is true that he had filed Matrimonial

Case No.83 of 2014 on 11.04.2014 under Section 9 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1995 for restitution of conjugal rights. However,

the same alone cannot be the ground for coming to a finding that

his wife has deliberately deserted him and has refused to live in

the matrimonial house. Since the wife has alleged that she is

being subjected to cruelty in her matrimonial house, no
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.582 of 2019 dt.18-10-2019
3/3

inference can be drawn against her for the reason that she is not

living in the matrimonial house.

6. Admittedly, the petitioner is a class-III

employee posted at Kolkata in the Finance Department of the

Government of India. Though, he has not disclosed his salary,

the opposite party has stated that his income is about 50-60

thousand per month.

7. Regard being had to the facts and

circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, no

illegality can be found with the order impugned whereby the

petitioner has been directed to pay Rs.10,000/- per month as

pendente lite maintenance allowance to the opposite party.

8. The application, being devoid of any merit, is

dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
vikash/-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 21.10.2019
Transmission Date 21.10.2019

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