High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR(F)/43/2021dismissed

Sudama v. Rakhi And ORS

2021-02-16Mr. Justice Harminder Singh Madaan2 pages

CRR(F) No. 43 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRR(F) No. 43 of 2021 DATE OF DECISION :- February 16, 2021 Sudama

...Petitioner

Versus

Smt. Rakhi and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN Present:- Mr. Lalit Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. *** The case has been taken up through Video Conferencing. Revisionist Sudama is feeling aggrieved by the order dated 4.6.2020 passed by Family Court, Rohtak directing him to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per month to his estranged wife Rakhi and minor daughter Kumkum , aged about 3 years residing separately from him. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the record, I find that the revision petition is without merit and is bound to be dismissed.

The revisionist husband is said to be working as a Peon in Government Primary School, Sampla Mandi, District Rohtak drawing Rs.23,400/- as carry home salary. Though he is said to have raised certain loans installment of which he is paying but the carry home salary is to be considered for the purpose of granting maintenance to his wife and minor daughter unable to maintain themselves. The respondent husband may raise a number of loans and then starts saying that most of his salary goes towards PARVINDER SINGH 2021.02.16 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRR(F) No. 43 of 2021 re-payment of installment of said loans, therefore, only his balance amount should be taken into consideration to return to his financial position. He cannot be permitted to take such type of pleas. The trial Court has found that Rakhi is wife and Kumkum is minor daughter of respondent Sudama. The trend of rising prices and taking into view the fact that things of even basic needs are getting very costly these days, the amount of Rs.7,000/- awarded to both the petitioners collectively cannot be said to be on higher side and there is no ground to interfere with the impugned order. I do not find any illegality or infirmity with the impugned order rather the revision petition is without any merit and is dismissed accordingly.

(H.S. MADAAN) JUDGE February 16, 2021 p.singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PARVINDER SINGH 2021.02.16 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh