SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rupinder Singh vs Palwinder Kaur on 5 February, 2019

FAO-M-408-2015 (OM) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

FAO-M No. 408 of 2015 (O M)
Date of Decision: 05.2.2019

Rupinder Singh ……..Appellant

Vs.

Palwinder Kaur ……..Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present: – Mr. Vikas Goyal, Advocate
for the appellant.

Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate
for the respondent.

*****

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL)

This appeal is filed against the the judgment and decree dated

17.03.2015 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar

(Mohali) by which petition filed under Sections 13 of the Hindu Marriage

Act, 1955 by the appellant-husband seeking dissolution of his marriage on

the ground of cruelty was dismissed.

During the pendency of this appeal, the respondent-wife had

filed an application bearing CMM-109-2016 under Section 24 of the Act for

grant of maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses. The said

application was allowed vide order dated 18.1.2018 and the appellant was

directed to pay ` 5000/- per month towards maintenance pendente lite from

the date of filing of the application i.e. April, 2016 and also ` 30000/-

towards litigation expenses out of which ` 20000/-, already paid, were
1 of 2
17-02-2019 03:51:30 :::
FAO-M-408-2015 (OM) -2-

ordered to be deducted.

It is not in dispute that the appellant is in arrears of the amount

of maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses which comes to

` 15000/-.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted at the bar that

the appellant is unable to pay the said amount.

In view thereof, this Court has no alternative left but to strike

off the defence of the appellant in view of the pre-emptory order dated

27.12.2018 vide which it was made clear that if the amount of arrears is not

paid on or before the next date of hearing, the defence of the appellant

would be struck off. Accordingly, the defence of the appellant is hereby

struck off.

As a result thereof, the present appeal stands dismissed.

The respondent-wife would be entitled to recover the amount,

in accordance with law.

(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN)
JUDGE

(HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
February 05, 2019 JUDGE
Gurpreet

Whether speaking /reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No

2 of 2
17-02-2019 03:51:30 :::

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Your email address will not be published.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