LALIT KUMAR Vs. ANURAG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to issue writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 11.02.2010 passed by the Additional Judge, Family Court, Roorkee in Case No.8/2009, Smt. Anurag Vs. Lalit Kumar.

(2.) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that Respondent moved an application u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. before Family Court, Roorkee for her interim maintenance stating therein that she got married with the petitioner on 9.3.2008 according to Hindu RITES. It was stated in the application that soon after the marriage, the petitioner and his family members were unhappy with her due to demand of dowry and they also used to commit Marpit with her due to which her womb was aborted. On 25.11.2008, she was ousted from the house by the petitioner and his family members with threatening to come back only along with a motorcycle from her father otherwise not to come back and since then she is residing at her parental house. Further, she does not know any work to maintain herself and her family members are bearing her expenditure. The petitioner is having 60 Bighas of land, he does the milk business, earns money being a partner in a JCB Machine and he also does the work of supply of brick and pebbles, thereby he earns Rs.20,000/- per month in total. Therefore, she demanded Rs.8,000/- per month for her interim maintenance against the petitioner. The petitioner also appeared before the court below, filed his objections against the application of the respondent and prayed for dismissal of the application. Learned Additional Family Judge, Roorkee vide his order dated 11.2.2010 after hearing learned counsel for the parties allowed the application of Respondent for her interim maintenance and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.2,000/- per month as interim maintenance from the date of order and Rs.5,000/- in lump sum being interim maintenance from the date of application till the date of order. Feeling aggrieved by the said order dated 11.2.2010, the petitioner has filed the present petition before this Court.

(3.) It is the admitted case of the parties that the respondent is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner who was married on 9.3.2008. The respondent in her application described the business of the petitioner and thereby shown to be earning Rs.20,000/- per month, however no solid proof in support thereof was produced but on the contrary, the petitioner in his objection also did not disclose about his source of income. Therefore, the court below after assessing the entire facts and circumstances of the case and on hearing learned counsel for the parties, rightly awarded Rs.2,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the respondent against the petitioner from the date of order and also rightly awarded Rs.5,000/- per month as lump sum amount of interim maintenance from the date of application till the date of order. I do not find any reasonable justification to interfere with the impugned order dated 11.2.2010 and the order passed by the court below is correct and justified.