RAJESH Vs. SMT. DASHODABAI
LAWS(MPH)-2018-7-488
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Decided on July 31,2018

RAJESH Appellant
VERSUS
Smt. Dashodabai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA,J. - (1.) This Revision has been preferred against the order dated 12.8.2015 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Narsinghpur in Misc. Criminal Case No. 134/2015; whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court ordered that petitioner/non applicant shall pay Rs. 1,000/- per month towards maintenance and Rs. 800/- as cost of the petition to the respondent/applicant.
(2.) The respondent/applicant filed a petition under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Narsinghpur. According to the respondent/applicant, she is wife of the petitioner/non-applicant. Petitioner/non-applicant and his family members misbehaved, harassed and tortured her. She was subjected to beating and demand of Rs. 50,000/- was made. In these circumstances she is living separately from her husband, petitioner/non-applicant. She has no means of income. The petitioner/non-applicant has agricultural land and earns Rs. 2,00,000/- per annum. Petitioner/non-applicant neglected her so she prayed for maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- per month.
(3.) The petitioner/non-applicant appeared before the Court and denied the averments of the petition preferred by the respondent/applicant. According to him the application was filed after ten years of marriage. She is living separately without reasonable cause. He tried to bring back the respondent/applicant. She refused to come back. He, therefore, filed a petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for Restitution of Conjugal Rights. This petition was allowed with direction to respondent/applicant to go and live with the petitioner/non applicant within 30 days of order but respondent/applicant did not obey the order. She refused to live with the petitioner/non applicant and she is living separately. He has no agricultural land. He is a poor person. Respondent/applicant wife is residing separately on her own volition. She is competent to earn, therefore, the application be dismissed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.