ATAMJEET SINGH Vs. PRABHPREET KAUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since both the petitions the first bearing No. 119 of 2015 by petitioner husband Atamjeet Singh and second No. 194 of 2015 by petitioner-wife Prabhpreet Kaur and minor daughter having arisen from the same very order dtd. 22/4/2015 on account of consanguinity of facts and law points are being taken up and disposed of together. Heard Mr. N.S.Shekhawat, counsel for husband-Atamjit Singh and Mr. Akshay Kumar Jindal, counsel for wife-Prabhpreet Kaur and perused the records.

(2.) Admittedly, marriage between Atamjeet Singh and Prabhpreet Kaur was solemnized on 4/9/2008 and out of this wedlock Divasis Kaur a minor girl who is presently residing with the mother was born to the couple on 22/7/2009. The wife claims that on account of demand of Rs.15,00,000.00 raised by the boy's side she was forced to institute criminal case against them and during the course of matrimonial feud, on 7/3/2011, the wife alleges she was assured by the husband that he will mend his ways and will shower love and affection took her back on the pretext of taking her to the matrimonial home at Noida but he took her to a Hotel where she was physically abused and tortured. On 10/3/2011, the wife called her brother at Ghaziabad and who rescued them and took them to Ambala and since then the mother and the girl are residing at the house of the parents. The wife and the daughter who were the initial applicants filed an application for maintenance under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C. on the grounds that they were not having any independent source of income nor own any immoveable and moveable property whereas the husband is working in Viniculum Solutions and then getting Rs.1,50,000.00 per month and thus prayed for grant of maintenance besides litigation expenses.

(3.) The husband on appearance in his stand taken in the reply claimed that the wife has intentionally and willfully refused to join his company and that earlier he had filed application under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights against the wife. The husband claims that the wife has willfully deserted him and is working at Ambala earning Rs.20,000.00 per month and denied his salary to be Rs.1,50,000.00 and terming the claim of the applicants to be unfounded sought its dismissal.