AJIT KUMAR NEELAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order dated 30.01.2012 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Palamau at Daltonganj in Miscellaneous Case No. 79A of 2006 whereby and where under the petitioner-husband has been directed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 3000/- for each children and Rs. 2000/- for applicant No. 1-wife. The petitioner-husband has been further directed to pay amount of arrear from the date of application till the month of January, 2012 in one lump sum. The monthly maintenance onwards from February, 2012 will be payable on the 10th day of the same month and so on and so forth. The opposite party is directed to pay the amount of maintenance within three months of the order, failing which the applicant can get it executed properly.

(2.) The short fact in the case is that Sunita Devi being wife of opposite party-Ajit Kumar Neelam married on 07.05.1989. From that wedlock, applicant Nos. 2 to 4 were born. Due to torture meted out to her and non fulfilment of demand of Maruti car as well as cash of Rs. 2,00,000/-, she was driven out from the matrimonial home. The further case is that opposite party-husband solemnized second marriage with Munni Kumari, D/o Ram Pravesh Ram on 18.05.2005. The children are studying and facing difficulty. The case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act is also pending between the parties. She has no independent source of income whereas husband is running a telephone booth and also working as an agent of Sahara India as well as he is having 12 Bighas of cultivable land and earns Rs. 25,000/- per month.

(3.) The opposite party-husband by filing the written statement denied the allegation. He claimed himself to be unemployed and have no source of income. He has only 15 decimals of land. He wanted the settle the matter and restore family relationship but the same was failed and false case of demand of dowry was also filed. Since he has refused to become Gharjamai, so case has been instituted upon him. The applicant-wife is an educated lady employed in a private school and presently she is working as Para Teacher getting sufficient amount to meet her expenses. The court below after consideration of the evidences adduced on behalf of the parties came to the conclusion that since the husband has contracted another marriage therefore, the applicant-wife under law can refuse to reside with such husband.