Dismissed

Gajendra Singh Rawat v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC9 Jul 2019CRLR/105/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J. dismissed a revision filed against an interim maintenance order dated 12.11.2018. The court declined to adjudicate merits, directed the Family Court to decide the principal Section 125 proceeding on merits within two months without being influenced by interim findings.

What did the court decide?

Revision dismissed; Family Court directed to decide principal Section 125 proceeding on merits within two months without being influenced by interim findings.

Gajendra Singh Rawat Vs State of Uttarakhand — Maintenance and Alimony | Uttarakhand HC (2019)

¶1

IA No. 8791/2019 (Miscellaneous Application with Objection) In CRLR No. 105 of 2019 Hon’ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

¶2

Mr. G.D. Joshi, Advocate for the revisionist.

¶3

Mr. P.S. Bohra, A.G.A. along with Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, Brief Holder for the State/respondent no. 1.

¶4

Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for respondent no. 2.

¶5

This Court is not venturing into the merits of the matter at this stage for the reason being by the impugned order under challenge the Family Court, Dehradun, in Miscellaneous Case No. 124 of 2018 ‘Smt. Monika Rawat vs. Gajendra Singh Rawat’ by virtue of an order dated 12.11.2018 had decided an application paper no. 7 kha for the grant of interim maintenance during the pendency of principal proceedings under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. The principal proceedings under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is yet to be decided on merits. By way of an arrangement, the Family Court after considering the pleadings raised by the parties had awarded an interim maintenance of a sum of Rs. 7,000/- to the respondent wife, considering the fact that the wife has to maintain herself, the maintenance here would mean a maintenance of the status of living, which she enjoyed at the time when the matrimonial relationship was cordial.

¶6

Considering the fact that it was the case of the respondent wife that the appellant was working in Dubai and was having an annual income package of Rs. 24 lakhs, the Court determined the interim maintenance is to be Rs. 7,000/- per month payable by him to the respondent wife.

¶7

This Court is of the view that since by the impugned order it is only an interim order, which was to continue during the pendency of the Section 125 application till it was decided on its merits. Hence, till it is finally adjudicated, the impugned order dated 12.11.2018 deciding the application paper no. 7 kha does not call for any interference, hence the revision is dismissed except with a direction to the effect that the Family Court would make all efforts to decide the matter on its own merits without being influenced by any of the findings, which has been recorded in the impugned order or in today’ order within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.

¶8

Accordingly, the revision is dismissed subject to the above observation.

¶9

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 09.07.2019

¶10

Pooja

Gajendra Singh Rawat v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajendra Singh Rawat v. State of Uttarakhand

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

Smt Saraswati Devi and Others Vs Santosh Singh and Others

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Jagdish and Others

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sardar Gurucharan Singh Makkad and Another Vs Jasminder Singh Makkad and Another

Arun Kumar Dubey Vs Union Of Inida

Basant Vs State Of Uttarakhand