VIKRANT ARORA Vs. SHRUTI MEHRA @ PALAK ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matrix of the facts & material, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, is that, initially, Smt. Shruti Mehra @ Palak Arora respondent-wife and her minor daughter Lyasa of about two years, have instituted the application for maintenance pendente lite u/s 24 of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act") in the divorce petition. Petitioner-husband Vikrant Arora s/o Joginder Pal Arora contested their claim, filed the reply, stoutly denied all the allegations contained in the application and prayed for its dismissal.

(2.) Taking into consideration the relationship between the parties, their status and income of petitioner-husband,, although the trial Court partly accepted the application for maintenance pendente lite and directed him to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month to his wife, but at the same time, the claim of maintenance of minor daughter Lyasa was negated only on the ground that she was not a party in the divorce petition, by way of impugned order dated 3.2.2014 (Annexure P3).

(3.) Instead of making payment to the respondent-wife, the petitioner-husband has straightway jumped to prefer the present petition, to challenge the impugned order, invoking the superintendence jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.