JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)These are two petitions filed u/S 482 Cr. P. C. challenging two
different orders passed by two different Courts in different
proceedings pertaining to the grant of maintenance. But in
both the petitions, the parties are the same and so are the
facts, therefore, they are dealt with together. The
petitioner/husband, after initial appearance, has been
proceeded ex parte in both the petitions. In the first petition,
the petitioner has challenged the order dated 2.5.2011 passed
by Shri Deepak Jagotra, Judge, Family Courts, Dwarka Courts,
New Delhi, directing the petitioner to pay ad interim
maintenance @ Rs. 10,000/- each per month to the
respondent nos. 1 and 2.
(2.)The case of the respondent no. 1 is that she got married to the
petitioner on 15.2.2004 according to Hindu rites and customs
and from the said wedlock, a male child, Master Pratham, was
born on 22.1.2006. The respondent no. 1 was subjected to
demand of dowry, domestic violence and mental agony,
because of which the relations between them got strained and
ultimately, the respondent no. 1 was thrown from the
matrimonial home on 29.6.2006. Since then, she is living with
her parents. So far as the income of the petitioner and the
grant of maintenance by the respondent no. 1 is concerned, it
was observed in the impugned order as under:-
6. It is further averred that respondent no. 1 is a man of
means and running an educational society in the name
Nishant Nirala Educational and Welfare Society and his
monthly income from the educational society is about
Rs. 35,000/- to Rs. 50,000/- per month. It is further
averred that respondent also imparts computer training
and his income from the same is about Rs. 80,000/- to
Rs. 1,20,000/- per month. It is further averred that
respondent is also running a Motor Driving School in the
name of Chacha Motor Driving Training School and earns
about Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- per month and
respondent is also running Nishant Computer Academy
and Nishant PT College at five different places and earns
about Rs. 1,50,000/- to Rs. 2,00,000/- per month from
there. It is further averred that respondent also owns two
plots of 200 sq. yds. at Rohini and Harsh Vihar having
value of Rs. Sixty Five Lacs and respondent has also
shares in different companies and has fixed deposits in his
name and earns Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 25,000/- per month
from there.
(3.)The petitioner was proceeded ex parte on 31.3.2011, as he
did not put in appearance after initial appearance. The
respondent no. 1 entered into the Witness Box and testified in
support of her complaint that the petitioner is not paying the
maintenance despite having the resources, while as she does
not have any independent source of income to maintain
herself and her minor son. She had also reiterated the
averments made in the application with regard to the various
sources of income of the petitioner.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.