High CourtsSingle Bench

Sukhdeep Dass vs Reena Rani

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 14 September 2012 · Citation: (2012) 09 P&H CK 0278

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tej Pratap Singh Mann, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227
CASE NUMBER
Civil Revision No. 5373 of 2012
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 244 words

T.P.S. Mann, J.—By filing the present revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-husband has challenged the order dated 6.8.2012 passed by the District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, whereby he was directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 2,000/- per month and the litigation expenses amounting to Rs. 5,000/-. Order passed by the aforementioned Court on 28.8.2012 while striking off his evidence on account of non-payment of arrears of maintenance has also been challenged. At the outset, counsel for the petitioner states that as per the instructions obtained, he does not want to challenge the order dated 6.8.2012. However, he states that in case one more opportunity is granted, the petitioner shall clear the outstanding amount of maintenance and also the litigation expenses, if not already paid.

2.

As the petitioner is willing to pay the amount of maintenance and the litigation expenses, the Court is of the view that order passed by the trial Court while striking off his defence needs to be set aside. Resultantly, the revision is allowed to the extent of setting aside the order dated 28.8.2012 passed by District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, while striking off the defence of the petitioner-husband, subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- as costs. While appearing before the trial Court on the next date fixed, i.e. 17.9.2012, the petitioner shall make the payment of the arrears of maintenance and the litigation expenses. The petitioner shall, thereafter, be granted adequate opportunities to examine his evidence.