High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jaspal Singh vs Sharanjit Kaur @ Shammi on 22 July, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaspal Singh vs Sharanjit Kaur @ Shammi on 22 July, 2009
FAO No. M-51 of 2004 (O&M)
                                                                      -1-

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                   CHANDIGARH


                                       FAO No. M-51 of 2004
                                       Date of decision: 22.07.2009



Jaspal Singh
                                                           ....Appellant


                    Versus



Sharanjit Kaur @ Shammi
                                                         ....Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA

Present: - Ms. G.S. Punia, Advocate,
           for the appellant.

         Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate,
         for the respondent.

                    *****

VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL)

CM No. 7246-CII of 2009

Allowed. Respondent-applicant is permitted to place on

record the documents Annexure R-1 to R-7.

FAO No. M-51 of 2004

This appeal by the appellant-husband has been filed for

declaring the marriage between the parties as void under Section 11 of

the Hindu Marriage Act, on the plea that the respondent-wife was

married prior to marriage between the parties, which was performed on

3.3.1996 at Ludhiana.

FAO No. M-51 of 2004 (O&M)
-2-

A male child, namely, Navjot Singh was also born from their

wedlock, who was about four years of age at the time of filing of the

appeal. Another child also born from the wedlock.

The learned Matrimonial Court dismissed the petition, in view

of the fact that the appellant knew about the status of the respondent-

wife at the time of their marriage. The learned Matrimonial Court held,

that no fraud was committed with the appellant in obtaining his consent

for marriage with the respondent.

The plea of the appellant, that his consent was taken by fraud,

was disbelieved and the petition filed by the appellant-husband was

ordered to be dismissed.

On notice, respondent-wife appeared in this Court, and moved

an application for grant of maintenance pendente lite and litigation

expenses. Vide order dated 25.3.2009, the application moved by the

respondent-wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, was

disposed of, and the respondent-wife was granted maintenance pendente

lite @ Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) per month

and a sum of Rs.5,500/- (Rupees five thousand five hundred only) as

litigation expenses. Direction was also issued to pay the amount within

one month from the date of passing of the order i.e. by 24.4.2009.

That the appellant failed to comply with the order. On

14.7.2009, time of one week was sought to pay the maintenance

pendente lite and the litigation expenses.

Today again the appellant has failed to pay anything towards

maintenance and litigation expenses.

It has further been pointed out, that the appellant has moved a
FAO No. M-51 of 2004 (O&M)
-3-

petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of

marriage by decree of divorce. Next date fixed in the case is 24.7.2009

before Sh. A.S. Narula, Additional District Judge, Ludhiana.

As the appellant has failed to pay the maintenance pendente

lite and litigation expenses, his defence is, therefore, liable to be struck

off.

Ordered accordingly.

In view of the fact, that the defence of the appellant stands

struck off, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant cannot

be taken note of.

The appeal is accordingly ordered to be dismissed. However,

this shall not bar the respondent-wife to execute the order passed under

Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in accordance with law.

(Vinod K. Sharma)
Judge
July 22, 2009
R.S.