OMI DEVI Vs. HANMAT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Omi Devi was married to Hanmant Singh long ago in December 1979. She has two children out of the wedlock. Her allegations were that she was neglected and the husband probably contracted another marriage. She moved a petitioner for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Karnal fixed it at the rate of Rs.300.00 per mensem with effect from the date of the application vide his order dated 10/6/1988. Aggrieved against it the husband preferred a revision and the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal while maintaining the rate of maintenance modified it and ordered that it was recoverable with effect from the date of the order of the trial Court.

(2.) Dissatisfied with the aforesaid order the present revision has been preferred. It has been alleged that the income of the husband has excessive and the maintenance fixed was on a lower side and besides that it should have been fixed from the date of the application as ordered by the trial Court and not from the date of the decision.

(3.) On behalf of the petitioner-wife it has been specifically pointed out that there was no negligence or reason for delay on her part and the petition of maintenance instituted in 1984 by her was decided only in 1988. In Shri Gurpartap Singh v. Smt. Satwant Kaur1, it has been held that it is not necessary to record special reasons for granting maintenance with effect from the date of the application. On behalf of the wife it has been pointed out that the husband is delaying recovery for one reason or the other. In the circumstances of the case, now in hand, the impugned order is set- aside and it is ordered that the maintenance was recoverable with effect from the date of the application.