HARISH CHAND Vs. SARITA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cr.Mp No. 1013 of 2021

(2.) Facts.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is no proof on record to show that respondent No. 1 was legally wedded wife of the petitioner. Therefore, no maintenance could have been awarded in her favour. Next he submits that the petitioner has loan liability of around Rs.24 lacs whreas respondent No. 1 is doing private job. Considering these aspects, learned counsel contends that the maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.12,000/-, respectively awarded in favour of the respondents is on the higher side.