SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dr. Satendra Kumar Srivastava vs Madhu Kumari @ Madhu Srivastava on 24 February, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.24 of 2020

Dr. Satendra Kumar Srivastava Son of Late Dina Nath Prasad Sinha
Resident of Mohni Gali, Mangal Market, Patna, House of Raja Prasad, P.S.-
Hawai Adda, Patna, District-Patna.

… … Petitioner
Versus
Madhu Kumari @ Madhu Srivastava D/o Late Kmoal Lal, Resident of
Village-Chhoti Kopa, P.S.-Naubatpur, District-Patna.

… … Respondent

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s:

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 24-02-2020

The present application has been filed “for quashing the

order dated 27.11.2019 in Matrimonial Case No. 6052 of 2014 by

Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna directing the (respondent)

petitioner to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month to the (petitioner/wife)

respondent pendente lite along with Rs. 40,000/- lump sum as

litigation cost (order dated 27.11.2019 contained in Annexure-5).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

learned court below has arbitrarily awarded Rs. 20,000/- per

month as maintenance pendente lite along with Rs. 40,000/-

litigation cost lump-sum. It is submitted that the petitioner has filed

Matrimonial Case No. 5475 of 2014 for restitution of conjugal rights

but the respondent is unwilling to stay with the petitioner.

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.24 of 2020 dt.24-02-2020
2/2

3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on

consideration of the materials on record, this Court is not inclined

to interfere in the matter. A perusal of the impugned order dated

27.11.2019 discloses that the petitioner has not offered any

indication of his own monthly income nor of his wife. The

respondent has claimed the income of the petitioner to be

Rs. 1,50,000/- per month. The petitioner, on being asked, could not

provide any specific details of Ajay Sahay with whom the

respondent is alleged to be living.

4. This Court therefore finds no illegality, infirmity or

error of jurisdiction in the order of the learned court below. The

petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J)
Ibrar//-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 26.02.2020
Transmission Date N.A.

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Your email address will not be published.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