Allowed

Sumitra Singh W/O Shri Omendra Singh, D/O Shri Hanuman Singh Hapawat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 Dec 2021CW/8114/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted the writ petition allowing deduction of maintenance from the respondent's retiral benefits and pension to be deposited into the petitioner's bank account, following consent of both parties.

What did the court decide?

Deduction of maintenance due till date and future monthly maintenance of Rs. 11,000 from respondent's retiral benefits and pension for deposit into petitioner's bank account.

Sumitra Singh W/O Shri Omendra Singh, D/O Shri… — Maintenance and Alimony | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR MASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8114/2021

¶3

Sumitra Singh W/o Shri Omendra Singh, D/o Shri Hanuman Singh Hapawat, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 98, Bandhu Nagar, Opp. Bus Depot, Sikar Road, Murlipura, Tehsil And District Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

I. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To

¶7

artment, District Circle Jaipur. oners Welfare Department, Shri Kishan Singh ranwas, Via Achrol,

¶8

Tehsil Jamwara

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)

¶11

HON'BLE MR. J R KUMAR GOYAL

¶12

Though, the matter comes up on an application No.1/2021 filed by the respondents for vacation of ex parte interim order dated 02.08.2021; but, with the consent of the learned counsels for the respective parties, the writ petition was heard finally on its merit at this stage.

¶13

In the writ petition, it has been prayed that entire retiral benefits of the respondent No.5, i.e., PF, gratuity and leave

¶14

encashment may be stopped and he may be directed to pay the amount of maintenance to the petitioner and her son regularly in her bank account.

¶15

The facts in brief are that the marriage in between the petitioner and the respondent No.5 was solemnized on 16.05.2010. The learned Family Court, Jaipur has, vide its order dated 11.02.2017, directed the respondent No.5 to pay the petitioner and her minor son on CrPC a

¶16

by the learned Family Court vide %sk&der dated +$+% a ,& Section 127 CrPC and the amount of rnantenance was enhanced to RS.II,OO~~~DB month with effect from +@& w.

¶17

3nment Servant at the

¶18

: [directly in the bank account

¶19

be Bank of India, Branchng to the petitioner. en granted voluntary

¶20

However, the respo en granted voluntary retirement with effect f ese circumstances, the petitioner has raised grievance in the writ petition that after his voluntary retirement, the order dated 15.01.2019 has been rendered infructuous and the respondent No.5 is not paying the amount of maintenance.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the averment made in the writ petition, submitted that the official respondents may be directed to deduct the amount of maintenance due till date from his retiral benefits and effective arrangement may be made so

¶22

that she may continue to get the amount of maintenance regularly without any interruptionlhindrance.

¶23

Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 submits that he has already filed an additional affidavit stating therein that he has no objection if the due amount of maintenance payable to the petitioner and their son be deducted by the official respondents from the arrears of his retiral benefits. He submits that the amount of monthly

¶24

they would abide by the direc Court with regard to payment of mainten ts of the respondent No.5.

¶25

Heard learned coud nd perused the record. In view of the su learned counsels for the

¶26

respective parties, this wri ed in following terms: (I) the respondeg 3% his retiral benefits by the official re W wm entire amount of maintenance du t @ 11,000/- per month and shall e bank account of the petitioner as ted 15.01.2019. As agreed between the par is due since May 2021.

¶27

(11) the amount of monthly maintenance shall be deducted from the pension payable to the respondent No.5 every month and shall be deposited in the bank account of the petitioner.

¶28

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

Sumitra Singh W/O Shri Omendra Singh, D/O Shri Hanuman Singh Hapawat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumitra Singh W/O Shri Omendra Singh, D/O Shri Hanuman Singh Hapawat v. State of Rajasthan

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

Prem Chand Gameti S/O Shri Dita Gameti Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj Kumar Fageria S/O Mahaveer Prasad Vs the State of Rajasthan

Prema Ram S/O Data Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Vibha Godara D/O Sh. Manohar Lal Godara Vs Rajasthan Staff Selection Board

Ajay Chandra S/O Late Shri Suresh Chandra Vs Union of India

Manisha Vyas D/O Anil Kumar Vyas W/O Chander Shekhar Dadhich Vs the State of Rajasthan