SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Somwati vs Ved Parkash on 22 January, 2019

FAO No.6953 of 2015 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
*****
FAO No.6953 of 2015 (OM)
Date of Decision:22.01.2019
*****
Somwati
. . . . . Appellant
Vs.
Ved Parkash
. . . . . Respondent
*****
CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
*****

Present: – Mr.S.P. Soi, Advocate,
for the appellant.

Ms.Eshjot Walia, Advocate,
for the respondent.

*****

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL)

This appeal has arisen from the judgment and decree dated

17.9.2015 by which a petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage

Act, 1955 [for short ‘the Act’] by the appellant-wife against her husband for

dissolution of their marriage on the ground of cruelty was dismissed.

This appeal was admitted on 12.01.2016. Thereafter, two

applications bearing CMM No.140 of 2016 and CMM No.83 of 2016 under

Section 24 of the Act were filed. CMM No.140 of 2016, filed by the

respondent/husband, was dismissed and CMM No.83 of 2016, filed by the

appellant/wife, was allowed by this Court vide order dated 12.12.2017 by

which the amount of `3000/- per month was awarded to the appellant

towards maintenance pendente lite to be paid by the respondent-husband

w.e.f. April, 2016 after adjusting the sum of `2000/- which was

independently awarded to the minor child. The respondent/husband did not

1 of 3
10-02-2019 10:15:56 :::
FAO No.6953 of 2015 -2-

pay the said amount rather he was proceeded against ex parte on 30.5.2018.

In view of the said order, the following order was passed on 25.7.2018: –

“Heard on application under Order 9 Rule 7 read

with Section 151 CPC for setting aside the ex

parte order dated 30.05.2018 against the

applicant/respondent-husband.

Counsel for the non-applicant/appellant has

objected to the setting aside of the exparte

proceedings on the ground that the

respondent/husband has not paid the amount of

maintenance pendente lite, on the basis of order

dated 12.12.2017.

Delay of 23 days in filing the application under

Order 9 Rule 7 read with Section 151 CPC for

setting aside the exparte order, is condoned.

Exparte proceedings against the respondent-

husband are hereby set aside, subject to condition

that the applicant/respondent husband shall pay

the entire arrears of maintenance pendente lite by

the next date of hearing.

Both the miscellaneous applications are allowed

accordingly.

Appeal is adjourned to 28.11.2018 for arguments.

It is made clear that if the arrears of maintenance

pendente lite are not paid till said date, the

application for setting aside exparte proceedings

will be deemed to have been dismissed, resulting

2 of 3
10-02-2019 10:15:56 :::
FAO No.6953 of 2015 -3-

in striking of the defence of the respondent in this

appeal.

Thereafter the case has been adjourned many times on the

request of the counsel for the parties and for the purpose of compliance of

the order dated 25.7.2018 but the respondent, who has put in appearance

today along with his counsel, has submitted that he has no money to pay in

compliance of the order dated 12.12.2017. In such circumstance, there is no

alternative with us but to strike off the defence of the respondent/husband.

At this stage, the respondent/husband has submitted that he is

ready and willing for the dissolution of his marriage with the appellant/wife

on the condition that he would not ask to pay the amount towards permanent

alimony or towards maintenance pendente lite. The appellant, who has put

in appearance today along with her counsel, has made a statement that she

would not claim either maintenance pendente lite awarded by this Court,

permanent alimony or anything from the respondent/husband if the petition

filed by her under Section 13 of the Act is allowed.

Thus in view thereof, the present appeal is allowed and the

marriage of the parties which was solemnized on 4.2.2001 is hereby

dissolved by a decree of divorce. Decree-sheet be also prepared accordingly.

(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN)
JUDGE

(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL)
22.01.2019 JUDGE
Vivek

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

3 of 3
10-02-2019 10:15:56 :::

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