Manoj vs Sarita Devi on 16 September, 2015

Through :
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL)

CM APPL.19815/2015
1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
MAT.APP.(F.C.)118/2015
3. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 28.07.2015 passed by the
Family Courts on an application filed by the respondent for maintenance
pendente lite. The Family Courts has awarded Rs.3,000/- for the wife,
respondent herein and Rs.1,000/- each to the three children.
4. Counsel for the appellant submits that the order was passed in the absence
of both the counsel as on account of a strike call given by the Bar
Association, the lawyers were abstaining from work. She submits that
serious prejudice would be caused to the rights of the appellant as the
learned Family Court has failed to take into consideration that three minor
children are in the custody of the appellant, they are residing with the
appellant and he is taking care of all their needs. She further submits that

the respondent is in illegal occupation of the room and she is also receiving
rent from another room @ Rs.1700/-, per month. Both the rooms form part
of the house, which belongs to the mother of the appellant. But, these facts
could not be brought to the notice of the Family Court at the time of
hearing. Counsel further contends that the appellant is only a daily wager
and earning Rs.350/- per day and approximately Rs.5,000/- to 7,000/- per
month, which fact was also not taken into consideration while passing the
impugned order.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*