LAWS(P&H)-2002-4-110

IQBAL SINGH Vs. JASWINDER KAUR AND ORS.

Decided On April 26, 2002
IQBAL SINGH Appellant
V/S
Jaswinder Kaur And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application filed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for brevity to be referred as 'the Act') for grant of maintenance pendente lite to the wife -respondent and to her two minor daughters namely Mandeep Kaur and Manpreet Kaur. The prayer made is that an amount of Rs. 5,000/ - per month be paid as maintenance pendente lite and Rs.11,000/ - be paid as litigation expenses.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the non -applicant filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act seeking dissolution of his marriage by a decree of divorce. It was alleged that the marriage between the parties was solemnized in November, 1983 at Malout in accordance with Sikh rites. From their wed -lock two children were born. One of the children Sandeep Singh allegedly fell ill in August, 1994 and was admitted in Jindal Hospital Muktsar. A team of doctors deputed by Civil Surgeon, Faridkot, had taken blood samples of the entire family of the non -applicant -appellant and it was found that the applicant -wife and the minor son Sandeep Kumar were suffering from HIV + Aids, which is incurable veneral disease. Therefore, non -applicant -appellant alleged that it is dangerous to his life to live and co -habit with the applicant wife. The Additional District Judge, Muktsar dismissed the petition of the non -applicant appellant that he was unable to prove the facts that the non -applicant -wife was suffering from Aids + HIV positive and dismissed the petition filed under Section 13 of the Act.

(3.) IN the application, it has been averred that she has no independent source of income and his family is dependent upon her parents, whereas the non -applicant -appellant has huge landed property and drawing Rs. 15,000/ - per month as income from the landed property as well as other sources. She has further averred that the non -applicant -appellant has filed an appeal in this Court. Therefore, to oppose the appeal, he has engaged a counsel and has also been appearing personally from time to time.