VIRENDER Vs. JYOTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of aforementioned two revision petitions filed for setting aside the impugned order dtd. 24/8/2017 passed by District Judge, (Family Court) Sonipat whereby the petitioner/husband had been directed to pay a sum of Rs.7,000.00per month as interim maintenance to the respondent(s) (Rs.4000.00 for respondent-wife and Rs.3,000.00 for minor child of the petitioner) in the proceedings under Sec. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2.) It is asserted that the petitioner is a private employee and does not have any movable and immovable property and thus is not in a position to pay a sum of Rs.7,000.00 per month to respondent(s). Otherwise also, parents of the petitioner are also dependent on him. It is claimed that respondent/wife is well qualified woman and competent to earn by way of doing stitching work. The impugned order has been passed without considering this factual aspect of the matter.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the case file.