LUCKY PANCHAL Vs. PREM LATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition under Ss. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC'), and Sec. 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, has been filed by the petitioner assailing the judgment dtd. 16/9/2019, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in MT No. 269/2018, titled Smt. Prem Lata v. Sh. Lucky Panchal, whereby the learned Family Court partly allowed the petition under Sec. 125 of the CrPC, filed on behalf of the respondent no. 1 herein. The learned Family Court in the impugned judgment held that respondent no. 1 would not be entitled to any maintenance, but awarded maintenance in the sum of Rs.8,000.00 per month to Ms. Chhaya, respondent no. 2 (minor child), till she remains unmarried, effective from her date of birth and with an enhancement of 5% every year.

(2.) Briefly stated, facts relevant for adjudication of the present petition are as under:

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the learned Principal Judge has erred in granting maintenance to respondent no. 2 (minor child) as she was born 19 months after the petitioner and respondent no. 1 had separated. It is further submitted that respondent no. 2 (minor child) was not a party to the petition filed under Sec. 125 of CrPC proceedings and the application for impleadement of respondent no. 2 (minor child) as a party was allowed on the day of final arguments. He stated that respondent no. 2 (minor child) was impleaded as a party in the aforesaid petition in a hasty manner and the learned Principal Judge did not adjudicate on the paternity of respondent no. 2 (minor child). The learned counsel for the petitioner has not pressed any other ground.