Court No. - 33
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 792 of 2018 Appellant :- Jitendra Singh Respondent :- Asha Devi Counsel for Appellant :- Vinayak Mithal Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
A stay application along with affidavit has been filed today, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.
The instant appeal has been filed against the order dated 25.10.2018 passed in Marriage Petition no.123 of 2016 by which, on an application 16-Ga, under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, maintenance pendente lite has been awarded to the plaintiff-respondent at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per month.
A perusal of the record would reveal that the plaintiff- respondent had filed marriage petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act by alleging that she had been married to the defendant-appellant on 12.07.2013. It is stated that at the time of marriage, the defendant was unemployed but, later, in the month of October, 2014, he got employment in the Indian Army and thereafter refused to provide her the status of a wife and his family members had also been harassing her. It is stated by her that on 15.08.2015 she was assaulted and thrown out of her matrimonial home and since then she has been deprived of her matrimonial home.
In the above backdrop, application, under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, was moved for maintenance pendente lite by claiming that the plaintiff has no means to sustain herself.
The court below upon finding that there is no denial as regards the marital status and nothing was there to show that the plaintiff-respondent was in a position to maintain herself, keeping in mind that the defendant was in service, awarded maintenance pendente lite at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per month.
The order passed by the court below has been assailed by the appellant by claiming that the marital status was seriously disputed and in fact a marriage petition No.38 of 2017 was filed in the Family Court at Mathura for a declaration that there had been no legal marriage between the appellant and the respondent. It has been stated that in absence of any legal evidence to substantiate the marital status, the court below was not justified in granting maintenance pendente lite.
We have gone through the documents which have been brought on record along with the stay application. The marriage petition alleged to have been filed on behalf of the appellant, through his power of attorney holder, is on record as Annexure No.2 to the stay application.
A perusal of the said marriage petition would reveal that the brother of the appellant was admittedly married to the sister of the respondent. It is stated that the family of the respondent wanted that both sisters get married in the same house and therefore by design the respondent was thrusted to develop proximity with the appellant, as a result some relationship got developed and some photographs were obtained by the plaintiff-respondent. It is stated that other than that, there is no valid legal marriage.
It has been admitted at the Bar that the above petition of the appellant was returned by the Court where it was instituted on ground of lack of jurisdiction.
From the material brought on record it appears that admittedly there had been some kind of relationship between the appellant and the plaintiff-respondent. Whether that relationship was that of a married couple would be finally adjudicated by the court. However, keeping in mind that in the objection to the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is on record at page 39 of the stay application, no specific objection as regards the legality of the marriage was taken, we do not find any error or legal infirmity in the order passed by the court below in awarding maintenance pendente lite, particularly, when it has not been demonstrated before us that the plaintiff-respondent has means to sustain herself. The appeal is therefore dismissed summarily.
Order Date :- 30.11.2018 AKShukla/-