In this civil revision, the High Court considered an appeal against the fixing of interim maintenance. The court directed the lower court to dispose of the pending divorce petition on or before 31.12.2009 in the interests of justice.
The lower court is directed to dispose of the petitioner's divorce petition pending before it on or before 31.12.2009.
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.
CR No. 1565 of 2009 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No. 1565 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: March 21, 2009
Gurtej Singh
.. Petitioner
v.
Balwinder Kaur
.. Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Mehar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 28.2.2009, passed by the learned court below, whereby in an application filed by the respondent-wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, `the Act'), maintenance of Rs. 1,500/- per month has been fixed as payable to the respondent wife. In addition to this, Rs. 5,500/- has been allowed on account of litigation expenses.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is merely earning a sum of Rs. 2,620/- per month by working as un-skilled labourer with M/s Pawan Kumar and Davinder Kumar, Labour Contractor. He has to maintain his minor daughter as well. It is not posssible for him to give Rs. 1,500/per month as maintenance to the respondent-wife.
Considering the fact that while issuing notice of motion, some litigation expenses are required to be fixed to be payable to the respondent-wife in lump sum and if it is found that the minor daughter is living with the petitioner and not with the respondent, as is observed by the learned court below in the impugned order, though there may be some scope for re-consideration of the amount of maintenance fixed by the learned court below, but still in my opinion, it would be in the interest of justice in the facts and circumstances of the present case that the learned court below is directed to dispose of the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage as early as possible. Accordingly, the learned court below is directed to dispose of the divorce petition pending before it on or before 31.12.2009.
CR No. 1565 of 2009 [2]
The revision petition stands disposed of.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
21.3.2009 mk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision court should interfere with the quantum of interim maintenance fixed by the trial court.
Whether the lower court should be directed to expedite the disposal of the petitioner's divorce petition pending under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Gurtej Singh
Balwinder Kaur
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
