A.N. Jindal, J. - (1.) THE precise question of law involved in the petition is whether the wife who strikes down the offer of her husband, refuses to keep him in the house and goes to the extent of seeking injunction against the entry of her husband in the house can still claim maintenance against him.
(2.) THE factual matrix, essential for disposal of the petition filed by Satnam Kaur and Tardeep Kaur Petitioners, is that Satnam Kaur was married to the Respondent on 2.2.1986 and out of the wedlock two children namely Amardeep Kaur and Tardeep Kaur were born. After the marriage, the Respondent -Onkar Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Respondent') went to Dubai and he used to visit India and stay with the Petitioners, but he started neglecting them for the last two years and stopped sending any money. Despite several letters written to the Respondent, no maintenance was paid, as such the Petitioners claimed a sum of Rs. 500/ - each of account of maintenance. It was further pleaded that the Respondent is earning Rs. 45,000/ - per month. In his reply, the Respondent submitted that he has already paid more than Rs. 7.00 lacs to the Petitioners during his stay in Dubai. Now he has no source of income and is entitled to be maintained by the Petitioner No. 1. While admitting the factum of marriage and relations of the Petitioner No. 2 and Amardeep Kaur, he further submitted that the Petitioner has been neglecting him since July, 1998. She turned him out from his house and filed a civil suit against him. He also gave Rs. 80,000/ - to Satnam Kaur Petitioner No. 1 on 13.4.1993 for purchase of plot in his name but she instead of purchasing the same in his name, purchased the same in her own name. She is still in possession of Rs. 28,000/ - which remained balance out of the aforesaid amount. The Petitioner No. 1 has involved him in civil litigation also.
(3.) REJOINDER was also filed.;