Dismissed

Yadwinder Singh v. Baljinder Kaur and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Mar 2021CRR(F)/84/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's challenge to a Family Court order awarding `5,000/- per month maintenance to his daughter. The Court held that maintaining a daughter is a bounden duty and rejected the claim that the petitioner, alleged to earn only `5,000/‑, was unable to do so. The petition was deemed without merit.

What did the court decide?

The petition challenging the maintenance order awarded to the petitioner's daughter is dismissed as it lacks merit.

Yadwinder Singh Vs Baljinder Kaur and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh

¶2

CRR(F)-84-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 9.3.2021

¶3

Yadwinder Singh … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

Baljinder Kaur and another

¶6

... Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶8

Present:Mr. C.L.Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶9

¶10

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)

¶11

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging order dated 5.3.2020 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Jalandhar, whereby the trial Court has awarded maintenance to the petitioner’s daughter @ `5,000/- per month.

¶12

Learned counsel has vehemently argued that it is a case where his wife has been declined maintenance and in fact she had not approached the Court with clean hands and when the petition was filed, she had stated that she is not earning anything whereas a perusal of the impugned order shows that she later on furnished an affidavit that she is earning something to the tune of `26,530/-.

¶13

MOHAN SINGH 2021.03.09 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

- 2 - CRR(F)-84-2021 (O&M)

¶15

The trial Court while deciding the application declined the prayer of petitioner’s wife for grant of maintenance mainly on the ground that she herself was an earning hand. However, the petitioner’s daughter has been awarded maintenance @ `5,000/- per month.

¶16

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶17

As far as the award of maintenance to petitioner’s daughter is concerned, it is bounden duty of the petitioner to maintain his daughter. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner himself earning merely 5000/-, but this Court is unable to accept the said contention as even a labourer can be expected to be earning around 15,000/- to `18,000/- per month. The petition is sans any merit and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶18

March 9	, 2021	(GURVIN	DER SINGH GILL)
mohan			JUDGE
	Whether speaking /reasoned	Yes / No
	Whether Reportable	Yes / No

¶19

MOHAN SINGH 2021.03.09 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Yadwinder Singh v. Baljinder Kaur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yadwinder Singh v. Baljinder Kaur and Another

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

Surinder Pal Vs State of Punjab

Sanjeev Rai Vs State of Punjab

Sushil Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Karan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Simranjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Manraj Singh @ Manmohit Singh @ Man Vs State of Punjab