SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Preeti Bala vs Jaswinder Pal Sharma on 30 May, 2018

CR No.1306 of 2016


CR No.1306 of 2016 (OM)
Date of decision: 30.05.2018

Preeti Bala



Jaswinder Pal Sharma



Present: Mr. Munish Jolly, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Aminder Singh, Advocate for the respondent.



Wife is in the revision petition seeking enhancement of the

maintenance pendente lite granted by the learned Additional District Judge,

Ludhiana, vide order dated 13.01.2016.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the

respondent-husband is working as a Librarian in District Bar Association,

Sangrur and his father is owner of five acres of land and the respondent-

husband is the only son of his parents.

On careful reading of the order, no doubt the court has noticed

that some agriculture land is in the name of the parents of the respondent,

however, the court rather than assessing the income from the land,

proceeded to fix the maintenance at Rs.4000/- per month for herself and her

two sons, who are minor.

1 of 2
09-07-2018 20:13:07 :::
CR No.1306 of 2016

While deciding the application under Section 24 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, the court while assessing the maintenance pendente lite is

expected to analyze the documents produced and thereafter arrive at some

conclusion. The application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act,

cannot be decided simply on the basis of assumption. The court ought to

have worked out income of the husband from all sources and thereafter

calculated the maintenance pendente lite keeping in view that the wife and

two minor children who must be receiving education.

In view thereof, the order under challenge is set aside. Learned

Additional District Judge, Ludhiana is requested to re-decide the application

under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act after considering the documents

which have been filed before it. In the meantime, husband would keep paying

Rs.4000/- per month as assessed by the learned Additional Judge till the

application is decided afresh.

Let this exercise be completed within the period of four months

from the date of receipt of the order.

May 30, 2018

Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No

Whether reportable:- Yes/No

2 of 2
09-07-2018 20:13:08 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2021 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