ARSHDEEP KAUR Vs. PRITAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is challenge to the order dated 25.11.2014, passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sangrur, whereby petitioner was not held entitled to interim maintenance from her grand father.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner being minor daughter of Nirbhai Singh son of Pritam Singh-respondent was entitled to seek maintenance allowance from her grand father. But the Court below has not considered this aspect while passing the order under challenge. Reliance was placed upon judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Nachhattar Singh v. Satinder Kaur and Others, 2007 4 RCR(Civ) 826, wherein such a view was taken.

(3.) Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner; facts of the case and view taken by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Nachhattar Singh's case , this Court is of the considered view that most of the facts are not disputed that application under Order 33, Rule 1 CPC was filed and present petitioner had sought maintenance from her grand father. The application was contested by respondent inter-alia taking the plea that applicant is not entitled to seek any maintenance because she is living with Jasvir Kaur, who has sufficient property/estate from which the applicant is being maintained by her mother. After the death of Nirbhai Singh, Jasvir Kaur had obtained Rs. 90,000/- as cash and several tolas of gold from the respondent. Apart from that, Jasvir Kaur has got other source of income.