SHRI RAHUL SETHI Vs. SMT. VARSHA SETHI AND ANR.
LAWS(P&H)-2011-3-582
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on March 15,2011

Shri Rahul Sethi Appellant
VERSUS
Smt. Varsha Sethi And Anr. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Nirmaljit Kaur, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision against the order dated 05.03.2011 passed by the District Judge, Family Court, Faridabad, whereby, an amount of maintenance allowance of Rs. 3,000/ - per month (i.e. Rs. 1500/ - each to both the Respondents) along with Rs. 5,500/ - as expenses for litigation has been ordered to be paid.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner, while impugning the said judgment, contends that the Petitioner is aggrieved with the grant of allowance of Rs. 3,000/ - per month to the Respondent -wife and the minor son as the same has been granted from the date of the application which should not have been done as the Petitioner had been regularly paying the interim maintenance granted from the date of the application. Secondly, the Respondent/complainant -wife did not ask for the litigation expenses but in spite of the same, the Court below had granted Rs. 5,500/ - as expenses. Heard. Admittedly, the revision petition has been dismissed. The second revision being barred under Section 397(2) Code of Criminal Procedure the Petitioner cannot file the present petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure under the garb of second revision petition. No doubt, it is well settled proposition of law that power under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised even if the revision has been dismissed, only to stop the perpetuating of injustice or in case of misuse of the process of law. No such ground has been pointed out in the present case. Hence, the discretionary power under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be invoked in the facts of the present case when the revision petition already stands dismissed.
(3.) EVEN on merits, there is no case. During the pendency of the petition under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure before the trial Court, the Respondent No. 1 had filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for the grant of maintenance pendente lite for herself and her son. The High Court vide order dated 24.05.2007 fixed an amount of Rs. 1500/ -as monthly maintenance to be paid by the Petitioner for the Respondents. Meanwhile, the interim maintenance under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure was allowed by the District Judge, Family Court, Faridabad vide Order 10.11.2009 and Rs. 1000/ - to the Respondent -wife and Rs. 1500/ - to the minor son was granted.;


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