Gokal Chand vs Lajwanti Alias Bimla Devi on 22 July, 2009

 CRM No. M-40585 of 2007                                    1



    IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB &
              HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

                                 CRM No. M-40585 of 2007 (O&M)
                                 Date of decision: 22.7.2009

Gokal Chand                                            ...Petitioner

                             Versus

Lajwanti alias Bimla Devi                              ...Respondent


CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:     Mr. AS Sullar, Advocate, for the petitioner.
             Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for respondent.

Rajan Gupta, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned

counsel for the respondent submit that by way of the impugned order,

only interim maintenance has been granted. In view of the fact that the

question of determination of maintenance is pending final adjudication

before the court below, learned counsel are agreed that the petition may

be disposed of with liberty to raise all their pleas before the court, before

which the proceedings are pending.

However, in meanwhile, it has been agreed between learned

counsel that petitioner shall pay the amount of interim maintenance @

Rs.1000/- per month from the date of passing of the order by the

appellate court i.e. Sessions Judge, Sirsa dated i.e. 11th May, 2007. It

has also been agreed between the counsel for the parties that the amount

which the petitioner may pay to the respondent now, may be subject to
CRM No. M-40585 of 2007 2

final outcome of the adjudication between the parties and should be part

of the final amount determined by the court.

Lastly, the counsel for the petitioner has emphasized that

the amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, already remitted by way of FDRs prior to

initiation of the present petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., may also be

taken into account by the trial court. It is made clear that the petitioner

will be at liberty to raise this plea before the trial court at the appropriate

stage. It will be open for the trial court to consider the plea of the

petitioner.

In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for

the parties, the respondent shall be entitled to interim maintenance in

aforesaid terms. The revision petition is thus allowed and the impugned

orders, in so far as they are contrary to directions contained herein, are

set aside.

The petitioner as well as respondent may pursue the

proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sirsa. The parties

are directed to remain present before the said court on 18.8.2009.

(RAJAN GUPTA)
JUDGE
July 22, 2009
‘rajpal’