Partly allowed

Bidhi Chain Singh v. Rekha Rajput and Anr.

J&K HC20 Dec 2022OW104/144/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against an order awarding compensation for marriage, the High Court modified the quantum to Rs. 3,00,000 each. The Court directed the father to deposit the amount in the daughters' bank accounts, conditioned on an undertaking that funds be used only for marriage ceremonies.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; impugned order modified to direct deposit of Rs. 3,00,000 each in respondents' bank accounts, conditional upon undertaking for marriage-only use.

Bidhi Chain Singh Vs Rekha Rajput and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | J&K HC (2022)

¶1

Sr. No. 41

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

OW104 No. 144/2017 IA No. 1/2017

¶4

Bidhi Chain Singh

¶5

…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

¶6

Through: Mr. Ajay Abrol, Advocate.

¶7

¶8

Rekha Rajput and another

¶9

.…. Respondent(s)

¶10

Through: Mr. Vikram Pangotra, Advocate.

¶11

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE

¶12

ORDER

¶13

20.12.2022

¶14

It reveals from the petition that the petitioner herein, being father of the respondents, has maintained the instant petition against an impugned order dated 14.08.2017 passed by the learned Principle District Judge, Udhampur upon an application filed by the respondents herein under Section 20(3) of Hindu and Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 whereunder the respondents-daughters had sought compensation/maintenance from the petitioner-father for their marriage as the respondents state to have been living with their mother separately from their father-petitioner herein.

¶15

Mr. Ajay Abrol, learned counsel for the petitioner would candidly submit the petitioner-father is willing and ready to incur the expenses of the marriage of the respondents and to pay the amount covered in the impugned order.

¶16

A perusal of the record of the petition would reveal that the respondents herein are of marriageable age and the condition put forward by Mr. Ajay Abrol,

¶17

2 OW104 No. 144/2017

¶18

learned counsel for the petitioner that the expenses incurred on the marriage shall be borne by him as and when the process of marriage is initiated, is seemingly, is unfair and unreasonable. However, the apprehension of Mr. Ajay Abrol is that in the event, the award amount covered in the impugned order, if is paid in advance to the respondents, there is every likelihood that the same may be misused by the respondents for the activities other than for marriage.

¶19

The said concern of Mr. Ajay Abrol, could be taken care of by providing that the petitioner-father shall deposit the amount of maintenance in two Bank Accounts in the name of the respondents-daughters and that the respondents-daughters shall refrain from utilizing the said amount for any purpose other than their marriage.

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondents is not averse to the proposal made by Mr. Ajay Abrol, as such, seeks disposal of the petition in light of the offer/proposal made by Mr. Abrol.

¶21

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to interfere with the order impugned insofar as the quantum of compensation/maintenance granted by the Court below in favour by the respondents, is covered and is modified to the extent that the amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- each shall be deposited by the petitioner either in an existing or a new bank accounts in the name of the respondents.

¶22

The respondents, however, shall not utilize the said amount except for their marriage ceremonies. The respondents, in this regard, shall submit an undertaking before the Registrar Judicial of this Court within two weeks’ time,

¶23

OW104 No. 144/2017

¶24

¶25

where after the petitioner shall deposit the aforesaid amount in their respective bank accounts within two weeks’ thereafter.

¶26

The petition is, accordingly, shall stand disposed of.

¶27

(JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE

¶28

Jammu 20.12.2022 Shivalee Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No

Bidhi Chain Singh v. Rekha Rajput and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bidhi Chain Singh v. Rekha Rajput and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Lal. Vs Ramesh Chander and Ors.

Shaheen Akhter Vs State Th.Social Welfare Deptt. and Ors.

Inhabitants of Village Manthal and Ors. Vs State Th.Excise Deptt.and Ors.

Kuljeet Kour Vs State Th.Transport/Rto and Ors.

Bansi Lal and Ors. Vs Modh. Afzal Bhat and Ors.

Shabir Ahmed and Anr. Vs Ut of J and K Th Its Principal Secretary Civil Secretariat Jammu and Ors.