PRABHAT BHARDWAJ Vs. VARSHA
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Smt. Varsha And ors.
Click here to view full judgement.
Prafulla C. Pant, J. -
(1.) HEARD . This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.09.2011, passed by Judge Family Court, Hardwar, in Case No. 73 of 2006, whereby said court has directed the revisionist Prabhat Bhardwaj to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 5,000/ - per month to his wife and the daughter (respondents) from the date of application moved under section 125 of Cr.P.C.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the revisionist Prabhat Bhardwaj got married to respondent no. 1 Smt. Varsha on 23.11.2000, in Hardwar. One daughter was born out of the wedlock. An application under section 125 of Cr.P.C., was moved by respondent no. 1 Smt. Varsha (wife of the revisionist), and respondent no. 2 Ms. Astha (minor daughter of the revisionist) in the year 2006, pleading that though the revisionist had means to maintain but he has neglected to maintain them. It is further pleaded by them that both of them are unable to maintain themselves. It is further pleaded by the respondents in their application under section 125 of Cr.P.C., that the revisionist started making demand of money to the respondent no. 1 Smt. Varsha asking her to bring money from her parental house, so that the revisionist may run his business. It is also pleaded that father of the respondent no. 1 gave Rs. 70,000/ - but the revisionist spent the amount in gambling and drinking liquor. It is further pleaded that the respondents were ousted from the house of the revisionist in the month of May, 2006, and since then they have been living in the parental house of the respondent No. 1. It is also stated in the application under section 125 of Cr.P.C., that the revisionist does money lending business, and earns Rs. 20,000/ - per month. The revisionist contested the application before the trial court, and filed his written statement. He admitted his marriage with respondent no. 1 and that Km. Astha was born out of the wedlock in the year 2001. However, as to the other allegations he denied the same.
(3.) IT appears that in the year 2008, he stopped attending the Family Court, Hardwar, where the application was pending. As such, the case proceeded ex -parte. The trial court recorded evidence of PW1 Varsha and PW2 Mahendra Kumar, and after hearing the applicants (present respondents) passed the impugned order dated 14.09.2011, whereby it was directed that opposite party Prabhat Bhardwaj (present revisionist) shall pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 5,000/ - per month from the date of application i.e. 29.06.2006.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.