PRABHUJI PRATAPJI MARWADI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed by the petitioner - father, aged about 52 years, to claim maintenance from his son, who is aged about 22 year, as written in the cause title, challenging an order dtd. 13/2/2019 passed by the Judge, Family Court No.3, Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc. Application No.1068 of 2016, which came to be refused by the Court.

(2.) Mr. Mahesh Bhavsar, learned advocate for Ms. Sonal J. Bhavsar, learned advocate for the petitioner - father submitted that, since the petitioner - father has averred in his application and deposition that he does not earn anything and respondent - son is earning Rs.25,000.00 p.m., he be awarded the maintenance of Rs.7000.00 p.m., as claimed in the application. He has further submitted that denying him maintenance at all from the son by the impugned order, is illegal and therefore, it is required to be quashed and set aside. He has further submitted that the petitioner - father is aged about 52 years, doing miscellaneous labour work and he may get Rs.100.00 to 150/- per day when he gets work. It is further his claim that some day, he may not even earn. He has further submitted that he has his old aged mother of 85 years and he is also suffering from various disease and taking treatment in the V.S.Hospital, Paldi. Therefore, he has submitted that this revision application be admitted and allowed.

(3.) Having heard Mr. Mahesh Bhavsar, learned advocate for the petitioner and going through the impugned judgment and order, it appears that out of frustration, petitioner - father has claimed maintenance from his son, who is fresh graduate and proceeding further studies, only with a view to deny enhancement of maintenance to his own wife. It is further coming out from the impugned judgment and order that petitioner is staying separate from his wife i.e. mother of respondent No.2 herein, since last 22 to 23 years. As admitted by the petitioner - husband in his deposition that initially an order of maintenance was passed to pay Rs.150.00 p.m. and on another application being filed for variation, Rs.600.00 was ordered to be paid as maintenance to the wife as also the son, who is present respondent No.2 herein. It is further admitted by him that respondent - son was aged about 8 to 9 months, when they separated. Petitioner - husband has admitted in his cross examination that thereafter he has never attempted to meet his own son nor filed any petition for custody of his son from the wife. He has further clearly admitted in his cross examination that in which school son was admitted by his wife, is not known to him and he has never tried to even ascertain the same. The petitioner - father has claimed in his examination-in-chief on oath that respondent is working in some Call Center at Paldi and running a snack lorry, opposite Vadilal Hospital and earns Rs.25,000.00 p.m. However, respondent - son has, in the written reply as also examination- in-chief on oath, stated that he is a fresh graduate and he took admission in Bhavans College for further studies. He has denied on oath that he is serving in Call Center and running a snack lorry, opposite Vadilal Hospital. He has further stated before the Court that there is not a single residential premises in his name. He has further deposed to before the Court on oath that when he was 7 months old, along with his mother he was deserted. He has further asserted that this application is filed claiming maintenance as a counterblast against the application for enhancement of maintenance filed by his mother against the petitioner - husband. Though he has claimed in his deposition that petitioner - father has sold off two storied Haveli in Rajasthan for Rs.45.00 lakh but without any documentary evidence in support thereof, as such according to the respondent - son, in his reply as also the examination-in- chief on oath, petitioner - father is serving as a Salesman in Kuber Gutkha Company and earning Rs.10,000.00 p.m. and in a free hour, he himself runs snack lorry.