ADESH KHANDELWAL Vs. SAROJ KHANDELWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed under section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, against the order dated 13.2.2008 passed by Addl. District Judge No.2 Bharatpur in civil Misc. Case (Hindu Marriage Act) No. 05/2008 whereby the application filed by the respondent under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 moved in the petition under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been partly allowed and the interm maintenance to the tune of Rs. 3,000/- per month along with cost of litigation has been granted in favour of the respondent.

(2.) The facts have been set out in the impugned judgment and hence I am not repeating the same here except wherever necessary.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed a petition under section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act against the respondent for grant of divorce decree with the averments that both the parties married on 8.11.2000 in Khandelwal vaishya Samaj Samellan, Delhi without any dowery. After marriage they lived together for some time and out of the said wedlock one sen Sahil @ Munna was born. The appellant is residing along with his old aged mother and younger brother. After marriage the respondent's behaviour towards the appellant and other family members was non cooperative as she asked the appellant for separation. But the appellant refused to do so. Her attitude remained adament and she went Agra on 19.11.2000 along with Gopal Ram Singhal and after few days the appellant brought her back but her behaviour was cruel and used to quarrel with all family members and threatened to commit suicide and her behaviour remained continued. Prior to marriage the respondent married with one Jitendra Jindla and without getting divorce she entered into second marriage with one Satya Prakash who lateron died and after his death she married with the appellant. The respondent and her family members suppressed this fact at the time of marriage. The respondent time and again approached to the police station against the appellant and other family members. On 5.11.2006 the respondent and appellant executed an understanding that respondent will reside at her parental house for three months and during this period appellant will pay RS. 1500 and the appellant regularly paid the said amount. Thereafter 27.12.2006 the appellant through letter asked the respondent to return back to the matrimonial house if there is change in her attitude and behaviour and she came on 12.1.2007 and tried to take away forcibly his son but she could not success. It is stated in the petition that the respondent is residing in the house of the appellant and the appellant is residing in a rented house along with his old aged mother, younger brother and minor son. The respondent filed a criminal case against the appellant in which she has obtained order for interim maintenance to the tune of Rs. 1500 per month vide order dated 20.9.2007 passed by Judicial Magistrate No. 2 Bharatpur. The respondent also instituted case under the Domestic women violence Act in which the Judicial Magistrate NO. 2 Bharatpur without considering the facts has granted maintenance to the tune of Rs. 1500/- per month vide order dated 31.1.2008. Thus the respondent is getting Rs. 3,000/- per month from the above orders.