Allowed

Swami Nandan Singh v. Priya Singh Alias Priya Bhardwaj

Jharkhand HC16 Nov 2022C.M.P./202/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a civil miscellaneous petition under Article 226 quashing an order. Despite the petitioner's claim of financial inability, the court upheld the original maintenance order directed at the wife and children.

What did the court decide?

The civil miscellaneous petition is allowed; the original maintenance order is upheld with arrears recovery directed.

Swami Nandan Singh Vs Priya Singh Alias Priya… — Maintenance and Alimony | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

C. M. P. No. 202 of 2022

¶3

----Swami Nandan Singh … …. Petitioner Versus Priya Singh @ Priya Bhardwaj … …. Opp. Party -----

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ----For the Petitioner : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate For the Opp. Party : M/s Indrajit Sinha & Ankit Vishal, Advocates

¶5

Oral Order

¶6

05 / Dated : 16.11.2022

¶7

The instant civil misc. petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 08.04.2022 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Original Suit No. 478 of 2020 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act by which the petitioner (husband) has been directed to pay Rs.8000/- per month to the wife and Rs.4000/- per month each to his two daughters.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage was solemnized in the year 2007 and they had a happy conjugal life and two daughters were born from their wedlock. The dispute arose when the petitioner brought his ailing father from the village to reside with him as he was not in a position to support himself. After that, opposite party deserted the petitioner for which the suit for restitution of conjugal right was filed. Thereafter the instant suit has been filed for divorce on the ground of cruelty.

¶9

With regard to the order of maintenance, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not in a financial position to pay the maintenance amount. It is also submitted that the requirement of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is that the wife should not be in a position to support herself for awarding the pendente lite maintenance.

¶10

The opposite party is highly qualified being M.Sc. and presently she is teaching in a private school. Certified copy of the evidence of the opposite party has been filed to that effect. As far as the husband is concerned, he has lost his job and, therefore, he is not in a position to pay maintenance. He is, however, ready to pay the maintenance to his daughters who are presently living with the mother and is also ready to keep his children.

¶11

It is submitted by learned counsel for the opposite party that four flats

¶12

are standing in the name of his father. Both the daughters of the petitioner are studying in Class-VII and II and in order to support the children, the opposite party had to take a family loan. The petitioner is M.B.A. graduate and is wellqualified. The petitioner is earning Rs.1,20,000/- from the income of rented premises which is standing in his father’s name.

¶13

In reply it is submitted that the petitioner’s father has four daughters and one daughter who was a widow has died and her two children who are fully dependent on their maternal grandfather who is father of the petitioner. 6.

¶14

After having considered the rival submissions it appears from the copy of the deposition of Priya Singh who has been examined as P.W.1 in Original Maintenance Case No. 145 of 2020 dated 24.05.2022, that she was a teacher in Kidjee School. She has, however, denied the suggestion given in the crossexamination that she was earning Rs.10,955/- as basic pay.

¶15

A consolidated pendente lite maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month for the opposite party and the two daughters of the petitioner will meet the ends of justice. Opposite party Priyanka Singh shall receive the amount for herself and on behalf of her two children. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the arrears amount has not been paid so far.

¶16

The court below is directed to take necessary steps for realizing the arrear amount from the petitioner.

¶17

The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed as at above.

¶18

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶19

AKT

Swami Nandan Singh v. Priya Singh Alias Priya Bhardwaj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swami Nandan Singh v. Priya Singh Alias Priya Bhardwaj

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

Mahamati Murmu Vs Sonamani Murmu

Chandra Bhushan Singh Vs Annpurna Devi

Josphine Kachhap Vs the Khunti Ursuline Society Trustee

Pramod Kumar Agrawal Vs State of Jharkhand through Superintendent of Police Anti Corruption Bureau Hazaribagh

Sanjay Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jitendra Kumar Shivam Vs the State of Jharkhand