High Court of Punjab and HaryanaFAO(FC)/274/2016allowed

Vipin Jain v. Anita Jain

2017-01-31Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

Crl. Revn. No. F-274 of 2016 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revn. No. F-274 of 2016 Date of decision:- 31.01.2017 Vipin Jain

...Petitioner

versus Anita Jain

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Ms Amrita Nagpal, Advocate for Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ram Pal Verma, Advocate for the respondent RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) Challenge in the present petition is to the orders dated 22.04.2016 and 01.08.2016 passed by the Family Court below. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Vide order dated 01.08.2016, the application moved by the petitioner was dismissed for recalling order dated 22.04.2016 whereby the defence of the petitioner was struck down on account of his non-appearance and non-payment of litigation expenses @Rs.2200/-. Instead of deciding the application moved by the petitioner, the learned Court below proceeded with the evidence of the respondent/wife and decided the main petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The petitioner was held liable to pay maintenance @Rs.4000/- per month from the date of filing of the petition to the respondents.

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner could not reach Court on time on 22.04.2016, as he got stuck in the traffic jam. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is working as a helper at a cloth shop GAURAV ARORA 2017.02.18 12:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Crl. Revn. No. F-274 of 2016 -2and is earning Rs.8000/- per month and thus the maintenance awarded to the wife @ Rs.4000/- per month is on the higher side. Before passing the final order, the relevant evidence is required to be led by the petitioner with regard to his income.

In view of the above, order dated 22.04.2016 and 01.08.2016 are hereby set aside and the instant petition is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court. A direction is given to the trial Court to give two effective opportunities to the petitioner to conclude his evidence and thereafter pass final order on merits.

January 31, 2017 ( RITU BAHRI ) G Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No GAURAV ARORA 2017.02.18 12:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh