RUPINDER KAUR Vs. AVTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MANDEEP Singh, petitioner No. 2 is a minor son born out of wedlock between Rupinder Kaur petitioner No. 1 and Avtar Singh, sole respondent. The marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent got into trouble and led to their separation. They are now divorced. Rupinder Kaur filed application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on 25.5.1996 praying for grant of maintenance of Rs. 500/- per month. She pleaded that she did not have any source of income, whereas respondent (her husband) was working at a Petrol Pump and earning Rs. 4000/- per month. As per the averment, he is also keeping buffaloes and is having agriculture income as well. Relying upon the evidence and the material produced before him, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana granted a sum of Rs. 1200/- per month as maintenance to the child, petitioner No. 2, which was the only demand raised in the application as petitioner No. 1 Rupinder Kaur has re-married in the meantime. While awarding this amount of maintenance, Judicial Magistrate observed that even a daily wager would be able to earn a sum of Rs. 3000/- per month and having regard to the fact that respondent is cultivating his own land, the above referred sum was awarded as maintenance for the child.

(2.) THE respondent impugned the said order by filing a revision before Addl. Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Ludhiana, who has reduced this maintenance amount to Rs. 500/- per month on the ground that the applicant had claimed the maintenance at this rate in his application and as such Magistrate could not have competently awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1200/- per month.

(3.) THE counsel for the petitioners, by referring to the case of Kamaldeep Kaur and another v. Balwinder Singh, 2005(3) RCR(Civil) 40 : 2005(3) RCR(Criminal) 258 (P&H) has urged that court can competently award maintenance more than the amount claimed by the applicant in the maintenance application. In this case, this court has observed that there is no specific restriction under Section 125 Cr.P.C. that the Magistrate cannot award more than the amount claimed in the application and that section rather imposes duty to award compensation, which the court would think just and reasonable.