Dismissed

Rajneesh Singh Chaudhary v. Purnima Thapar

Punjab & Haryana HC27 May 2016CR/3752/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge upheld a revision petition challenging a maintenance order. The court rejected the petitioner's claim that 15,000 was excessive, noting the wife's alleged income was uncertain and no proof was offered regarding son living arrangements or the genuineness of payments to parents.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed; original maintenance order sustained.

Rajneesh Singh Chaudhary Vs Purnima Thapar — Maintenance and Alimony | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

C.R. No.3752 of 2016 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

C.R. No.3752 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision.27.05.2016

¶5

Rajneesh Singh Chaudhary

¶6

.....Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Dr. Purnima Thapar ........Respondents

¶9

Present: Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

¶11

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

¶12

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

-.-

¶15

K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)

¶16

The husband is before this Court complaining that 15,000/ordered as maintenance for wife and son is excessive and it is far beyond his own means. It is seen from the salary certificate produced that his gross salary is 60,000/- and odd and after deduction, he is drawing a salary of 40,000/- plus. The employer has stated that he is paying 25,000/- to the parents as maintenance as per the Magistrate's order. I suspect that this is a self-inflicted order obtained by the petitioner willingly to stave off the claim for maintenance by the wife and child. There is no proof offered to me that there was a claim made by the parents against him and that the amount of 25,000/- which he has been directed to pay ought to be taken as reason for deduction out of his net salary. I must also observe that if a person shall be willing to pay 25,000/- to his parents, it is inconceivable as to why he will make a fuss about giving 15,000/- as maintenance to the wife and child. It is also argued by the counsel that the wife is doing post-doctoral work in the PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.05.30 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and Shimla University and that she is drawing income of more than 25,000/-. integrity of this document

¶17

C.R. No.3752 of 2016 (O&M) -2-

¶18

I find from the information provided and available in the court records that the amount of what she has received pertains to the period March 2015 and the information available from the record shows that her continuance was assured upto 31.03.2015 only. I have nothing before me to show that there has any source of income for her beyond the said period. The counsel also contends that she has authored a book and she has been earning royalties. The book authored by her is priced `750/- and the author need not necessarily be earning royalties that can provide enough to support herself and her child unless there is proof of quantum of sales of the book from the publisher's sources. The amount of what is directed to be paid by the matrimonial court is modest for a person who has adequate resources and I will find no reason for making an interference.

¶19

The order already passed is sustained and the revision petition

¶20

is dismissed.

¶21

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE

¶22

May 27, 2016 Pankaj*

¶23

PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.05.30 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajneesh Singh Chaudhary v. Purnima Thapar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajneesh Singh Chaudhary v. Purnima Thapar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surjit Singh and Ors. Vs Avtar Singh and Ors.

Ved Prakash Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Raghbir Singh Vs Babaldeep Singh Alias Buta Singh

Gulgul Enterprises Vs Green Land Public School Ludhiana and Anr.

Rajan Katyal Vs Baldev Krishan

Davinder Singh Vs Sukhpal Singh and Anr.