AJAY DIKA Vs. SHALU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby to set aside the impugned judgment dated 15.05.2017 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Central Distt., Tis Hazari Courts in MT No.5861924/2016 whereby the learned Judge allowed the petition of the respondents and awarded the maintenance of Rs.10,000/- p.m. to respondent no.1 and Rs.5,000/- p.m. to respondent no.2 from the date of filing of the petition.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the respondents have filed a petition U/s 125 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner and the petitioner filed the written statement and argued the matter on the point of interim maintenance. Accordingly, the Trial Court was pleased to award the maintenance of Rs.2,000/- p.m. to Respondent no.1 and Rs.1,000/- p.m. to Respondent no. 2 vide order dated 13.04.2011. Respondent no.1 had filed a petition u/s 12/17/18/19/20/ 22/23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act against petitioner and his father Sh. Sunder Singh Dika and both the petitions were pending before same Mahila Court and even evidences of both the cases were jointly taken up by the said Court and the relevant order dated 26.08.2013 was passed. The petitioner was acquitted by learned MM- 02, Mahila Court on 10.10.2016 in domestic violence case. The said court was also trying the other case u/s 125 Cr.P.C. and the petitioner was never told by his lawyer that the case u/s 125 Cr.P.C. is still pending and the petitioner was under impression that both these cases were disposed off and he has to pay Rs.3,000/- p.m. jointly to both the Respondents and thereby the petitioner used to pay the same to the Respondents till today before the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Central Tis Hazari, Delhi.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not aware about the fact that the maintenance case was still pending and same was transferred to the Principal Judge, Family Court and moreover neither petitioner was informed by his counsel nor any court notice was received from the Family Court about transfer of the case to said Court. However, on account of non-appearance of the petitioner and his counsel, the matter was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 27.03.2015 and finally the judgment and order was passed against the petitioner on 15.05.2017. The petitioner came to know about the outcome of the impugned judgement dated 15.05.2017 and also about the pendency of the petition on 04.08.2017, when he received execution petition for impugned judgement dated 15.05.2017. Being aggrieved, the present petition has been filed.