PHOOLA Vs. OM PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER had filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance against the Respondent. The case of the Petitioner, in brief, was that she was married to the Respondent on 18.3.1964. They were blessed with two sons and one daughter out of the wedlock. However, Kuldeep, son of the parties, had later died. The behaviour of the Respondent towards the Petitioner remained good till the birth of her son Umed Singh but, thereafter, the Respondent developed illicit relations with another lady teacher, his co -employee and started giving beatings to the Petitioner. Petitioner was thrown out of the matrimonial home at the time when she was expecting her son Kuldeep. For the last eleven years, the Petitioner had been residing with her brothers and maternal uncle. The Respondent had refused to maintain the Petitioner and was trying to grab her property.

(2.) RESPONDENT , in his reply, averred that the petition was liable to be dismissed as the Petitioner had refused to live in the matrimonial home. The petition had been filed to defame the Respondent. The Respondent was always ready and willing to maintain the Petitioner. The Respondent was also looking after his aged parents. Respondent had purchased the land in the name of the Petitioner in the year 1979 out of his own funds. The basic pay of the Respondent was Rs. 10,000/ -per month.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that admittedly, the Respondent was getting Rs.10,000/ -per month and was residing with his son, who was a practicing lawyer. The Petitioner was residing with her daughter and was unable to maintain herself.