Harmal and Another vs Lichhmi Devi

Ram Chand Gupta, J.—The present revision petition has been filed against order dated 06.03.2012 passed by learned District Judge,

Family Court, Bhiwani vide which petitioners were directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- each to respondent for her maintenance. I have heard learned

counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order.

Admitted facts are that, respondent is wife of petitioner No. 1 -Harmal and mother of petitioner No. 2 -Rajesh Kumar. She was turned out of

the matrimonial home. She has no income to maintain herself. Petitioners own sufficient agricultural land measuring about 20 acres. They were

directed to pay interim maintenance to respondent by learned trial court during the pendency of petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C. However, when the case

was fixed for payment, none appeared on their behalf and hence, they were proceeded ex parte. No application was moved on behalf of the

petitioners to set aside the said order. Learned District Judge, Family Court, Bhiwani relied upon un-rebutted evidence adduced by the

respondent-wife, who also placed copy of Jamabandi, Ex. P1 and copy of release deed, Ex. P2 on the record showing that petitioners own

sufficient agricultural land and hence, they were directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- each as maintenance to respondent. The impugned order is based on

evidence.

In view of the aforementioned facts, it cannot be said that any illegality or material irregularity has been committed by learned court below in

passing the impugned order, warranting interference by this Court. Hence, the present revision petition is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any

merit.