SURINDER PAL Vs. AMRIT KUMAR SAMRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is father of respondent. He has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the legality and propriety of the order dated January 24, 2013 passed by Sh.R.P.S. Cheema, JMIC, Patiala, directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.3500/ - per month as maintenance allowance to the petitioner from the date of the order dated January 24, 2013, besides requiring the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.5000/ - as litigation expenses.

(2.) THE petitioner alongwith his wife had filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against the respondent claiming that Abheet Kumar and respondent Amrit Kumar are the sons of petitioner and his wife. It was claimed that Abheet Kumar is confined in District Jail, Hoshiarpur and he does not own any moveable and immoveable property whereas respondent is a College Lecturer and drawing at least Rs.30000/ - per month as salary and the wife of the respondent is also drawing Rs.25000/ - per month. The petitioner and his wife requested the respondent to pay maintenance but the respondent refused to pay any amount as he remained busy in purchasing car or plot for construction of the house. Petitioner claims himself to be hand pump repairer but on account of old age he is unable to work. The wife of the petitioner who has died now claimed that she was unable to work on account of her joint pains, due to increase of Uric Acid in the blood being 63 aged years and she had no source of income. The petitioner claimed that he was suffering from chronic disease and required money for medicines. He also suffers from joint pains for the last 30 years. Entire gold ornaments have been sold by the petitioner and his wife for buying the medicines and had borrowed money from the friends and relatives.

(3.) THE respondent contested the claim of the petitioner taking up the plea that the petitioner has got earnings from his business of digging and repairing bore wells. He also works under NAREGA scheme and receiving remuneration of Rs.123/ - per day. He is also a member of village panchayat and has himself got registered under Atta Dal Scheme run by Punjab Government. He has got ample income and is able to maintain himself. Respondent claimed that his net salary is Rs.31808/ - per month out of which Rs.24000/ - per month was deducted as bank loan instalment and Rs.1200/ - per month was paid as premium of insurance policy. The respondent has to spend for personal necessities such as books, stationary, phone, medicine, clothes, social needs, newspapers and other subscriptions being a responsible member of the Society and is under financial strain. The petitioner had not financed financial needs of the respondent from the beginning. Petitioner suffocated and strangulated the childhood of the respondent as the respondent left the home 10 years back when he was a student and financially not independent. The petitioner and his wife had allowed the brother of respondent to join gym and arranged a heavy diet for him. He was married and sent abroad discriminate against the respondent. The petitioner owns ancestral house for the last 35 years. The litigation of elder brother of respondent Abheet is being looked after by the respondent. The total carry home salary of the respondent was Rs.7808/ - per month out of which a sum of Rs.1200/ - per month was paid as premium of postal Life Insurance and life Insurance. Salary of respondent is only Rs.6608/ - per month which is not sufficient for sustaining the respondent himself. The following issues were framed for determination: -