SANTOKH SINGH Vs. SURINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SURINDER Kaur wife of Santokh Singh the present Revision petitioner filed an application under Section 125 Criminal Procedure Code in her own behalf and on behalf of her minor son Baljinder Singh claiming maintenance. The application was decided by Sh. P.S. Virk, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Nawanshahr vide his order dated 12 -3 -1989 whereby a sum of Rs. 100/ - per month was granted as maintenance to the minor child but application on behalf of Surinder Kaur, the female spouse was dismissed. Aggrieved by this order Surinder Kaur preferred a revision petition which was decided by Shri. H.C. Modi, Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar vide his judgment dated 4 -2 -1991. The Revision Petition was accepted and a sum of Rs. 200/ - per month was granted as maintenance to Surinder Kaur from the date of the application. Maintenance amount allowed to the minor child was also enhanced to Rs. 150/ - per month from the date of application. Dissatisfied with this judgment Santokh Singh has filed the present revision petition.

(2.) THE main grouse of the petitioner is that he was residing in village Majari, District Hoshiarpur but no notice was given to him of the revision filed by the respondent. No summons were sent to the Magistrate within whose jurisdiction he was residing for getting his service effected. The well reasoned order of the Trial Court was reversed without affording him an opportunity of being heard. I have heard the counsel for the parties and have perused the record of the Revisional Court.

(3.) THE Revision Petition was entertained on 3.4.1989 and notice was ordered to be issued to the present petitioner. There is only one report of the Process Server on the record which is to the effect that Santokh Singh was informed of the case pending against him but he refused to accept service. This report is made by one Process Server in the Court premises at Nawan -Shahar and it was attested by Additional Senior Sub -Judge, Nawanshahr. There is nothing on record to show as to how summons were sent to Nawanshahr when the petitioner was a resident of District Hoshiarpur. The case was thereafter adjourned many times and the presence of the counsel for the parties was noted. On 3.1.1991 when the case was actually taken for hearing it was found that neither the present petitioner had been served nor he had engaged any counsel. The Court, therefore, passed an order that service of the respondent be got effected by making proclamation through beat of drum and by way of affixation of summons for 21.1.1991. There is no repeal of any process server on the file to the effect that any proclamation was made in the village of the petitioner by beat of drum but on the basis of report made on the file by someone, ex parte proceedings were taken against Santokh Singh. The case was heard in his absence and the impugned order was passed.