The revision petition filed by the husband challenging maintenance and litigation expenses ordered against him under the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed, holding the amount not harsh given the wife's resourceless condition.
Petition dismissed; order of the Trial Court confirming maintenance and litigation expenses was upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Civil Revision No.137 of 2009
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No.137 of 2009 Date of decision: 23.04.2009.
Madan Pal @ Madan Lal
Petitioner
Versus
Parvesh Kumari
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND.
Present: Ms. Poonam Sharma,Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. N.S.Shekhawat, Advocate for the respondent
S.D.ANAND, J.
The parties are estranged spouses who are litigating before the Trial Court in the context of a petition filed by the respondent-wife against the petitioner-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for the grant of a decree for dissolution of the marriage. The respondent-wife also filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act which was allowed by the learned Trial Court which (the learned Trial Court) ordered that the petitioner-husband shall pay a sum of Rs.1000/- per month as maintenance pendente-lite with effect from the date of the application and shall also pay a sum of Rs.3300/- as litigation expenses.
The petitioner-husband is in revision.
Civil Revision No.137 of 2009 -2-
The learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner-husband, argues that the petitioner having no source of income whatsoever ought not to have been burdened with any amount of maintenance pendente-lite.
It is apparent from the impugned order that the learned Trial Court proceeded on the premise that the petitioner-husband is a labourer. However, it cannot be ignored from consideration that the respondent-wife has to fend for herself and also her two children whom she had begotten from the loins of the petitioner-husband. There is no controversy about the legitimacy of the children. There is not even an averment on behalf of the petitioner-husband that the respondent-wife has any means of sustenance.
Every able bodied husband is under a legal obligation to maintain a resourceless wife and the children of the parties. Even a daily wager gets about Rs.150/- per day in these days. In that view of things, the quantum of maintenance fixed by the learned Trial Court and also the amount of litigation expenses cannot be said to be harsh in character.
The petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered
to be dismissed.
April 23, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether maintenance pendente-lite imposed on a petitioner with no source of income is sustainable when the respondent wife has no means of sustenance.
Whether the quantum of maintenance and litigation expenses ordered by the trial court amounts to a harsh or unsustainable burden.
Whether the Trial Court's presumption that the petitioner is a labourer justifies the maintenance amount fixed.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Madan Pal @ Madan Lal
Parvesh Kumari
S.D. Anand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
