HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
V K Kak
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against a composite order passed by District Judge, Srinagar accepting alimony at the rate of 13000/ - per
month and litigation expenses to the extent of Rs. 1200/ -in favour of the
respondent wife, and simultaneously issuing a direction to one Ramash
Agarwal of Gandhi nagar, Jammu. directing him to produce that property
which was according to the respondent entrusted to him by her
father -in -law, namely, the father of the petitioner as also an agreement
alleged to have been executed between the parents of the parties.
(2.) WHEN his revision petition came to be admitted, this court issued an order staying the operation of the impugned order subject to
the condition that the petitioner will deposit Rs. 150/ - per month as
monthly maintanance from the date it fell due from him in terms of the
trial courts order and a sum of Rs. 750/ - by way of litigation expenses
in this court.
(3.) TODAY I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.
Mr. Choudhrys contention is that the learned District Judge has proceeded with hot haste in making the order for payment of maintenance
and litigation expenses without allowing the parties to produce any
evidence in support of their respective cases. His contention is that the
petitioner had in his objections to the maintenance application stated
that the respondent had an independent income which ought to have been
taken into account while granting the monthly maintenance in her favour.
As against this Mr. N, K, Ganjoo, learned counsel for the respondent
argued that this being a matter requiring to be decided in a summary
manner, even affidavits of the parties or their witnesses are enough to
form a basis for the decision of the court, Even assuming what Mr. Ganjoo
states is correct, one thing is sure that the court has to call upon the
parties to lead evidence in support of their respective cases and leave
it to them as to in what manner they would like to prove their cases.
This may be done by examining the witnesses or by filing affidavits. It
is common ground that the parties were never called upon to lead any
evidence on the application as well as the objections filed to it. I
have, therefore, no option but to set aside, the order of the court to
this extent and remit the case back to it with the direction that it will
pass fresh order on the application of the respondent for grant of
monthly maintenance as well for litigation expenses after giving the
parties an opportunity to prove their respective cases by whatever manner
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.