High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
Rajinder Kaur v. Kuldeep Singh - FAO-206-M-2002  RD-P&H 5906 (24 August 2006)
in FAO No. 206-M of 2002 (1)
Rajinder Kaur ...Applicant-appellant
Kuldeep Singh ...Respondent
Present: Shri M.S. Rakkar, Senior Advocate, with Shri P.S. Bath, Advocate, for the applicant-appellant.
Shri Gurnam Singh, Advocate, for the respondent.
The appellant has sought the striking off the defence of the respondent for non payment of arrears of maintenance awarded by this Court in the proceedings under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act').
Vide order dated 9.9.2003, this Court awarded maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.1000/- from the date of the application i.e. 29.8.2002 and litigation expenses of Rs.7000/-. It is the case of the appellant that the said amount of maintenance has not been paid and, therefore, the defence of the respondent is liable to be struck off. The appellant has given calculations after adjusting the amount of maintenance paid by the respondent from time to time including the amount of maintenance granted under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The appellant has also given the calculations given by the respondent to the appellant in terms of the order passed by this Court on 31.1.2006. It is admitted between the parties that vide order dated 24.11.2001, an amount of Rs.800/- was awarded from July, 2001, as maintenance by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
CM No. 9562-CII of 2006
in FAO No. 206-M of 2002 (2)
The dispute between the parties primarily revolves around the question whether the payment made in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has to be adjusted towards the amount of maintenance awarded by this Court in the proceedings under Section 24 of the Act or the said amount is in satisfaction of the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. As per the appellant, the payment of Rs.11,850/- has been made before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate.
In support of such payments made before the learned Magistrate, the appellant has relied upon the orders passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, from time to time, the copies of which have been appended as Annexures P.1 to P.8. Since such payments have been made before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, the mere fact that they were made after the order was passed by this Court, will not amount their adjustment in the maintenance awarded in terms of the order passed by this Court under Section 24 of the Act. Such payments relate to the period in respect of which maintenance was granted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and that too prior to 29.8.2002, from which date, this Court awarded Rs.1000/- as maintenance payable to the appellant.
In view of the above, the said payment of Rs.11,850/- cannot be adjusted towards the maintenance awarded by this Court and payable from 29.8.2002, merely for the reason that such payments were made after the order passed by this Court.
Accordingly, it is held that the respondent is in arrears of an amount of Rs.14,150/- as on 31.1.2006 and thereafter, @ Rs.1000/- per CM No. 9562-CII of 2006
in FAO No. 206-M of 2002 (3)
month. The respondent is granted one month's time to make the payment of arrears, failing which the defence of the respondent shall be struck off.
CM is disposed of accordingly.
30.8.2006 (HEMANT GUPTA)
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.