110 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR (F) No.123 of 2014 Date of decision: July 08, 2014 Bhagwat Sawroop Panwar and another ...Petitioners Versus Smt.Sushma Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH Present: Mr.Himanshu Puri, Advocate for the petitioneRs.**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.
Petitioners Bhagwat Sawroop Panwar and Kusum Lata have filed this revision petition against Sushma Singh respondent under Section 401 Cr.P.C.challenging the judgment dated 14.05.2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Gurgaon vide which the interim maintenance of `5000/- per month granted by learned JMIC, Gurgaon vide judgment dated 07.01.2013, has been upheld.
In the revision petition, petitioner stated that the trial Court has allowed the petition of the respondent and has wrongly and illegally directed the petitioners to pay `5000/- per month as interim maintenance and further to allow the respondent an entry into the matrimonial home/shared household or in alternate to pay the rent for a rental accommodation to the respondent.
The appeal filed by the present petitioners has also been dismissed by learned Sessions VINEET GULATI201408.01 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRR (F) No.123 of 2014 -2- Judge, Gurgaon vide judgment dated 14.05.2014.
It is further stated in the petition that learned Courts below have failed to appreciate that petitioner No.1 has debt on his head, for which he was being burdened to the tune of `15000/- per month on account of interest.
The learned lower Court wrongly interpreted that since he was able to make the payment of interest, he could easily make payment for the maintenance of the respondent.
It is also stated in the petition that as a matter of fact, since he was able to pay the debt amount and the recurring interest on the same, he has to sell off the house in question and learned Court below failed to take notice of this fact.
I have gone through the record and have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
From the record, I find that the findings of both the Courts below on the application under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act are concurrent.
Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon directed present petitioners to pay `5000/- as interim maintenance and to allow entry of the respondent into the matrimonial home/shared household or in alternate to pay the rent for a rental accommodation as per her standard of living in the matrimonial/shared household.
These findings have been upheld by learned Sessions Judge, Gurgaon vide judgment dated 14.05.2014.
Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that petitioner No.1 Bhagwat Sawroop Panwar has no income to pay `5000/- as interim maintenance but at the same time, he admitted that petitioner No.1 is paying `15,000/- per month as interest.
If petitioner No.1 is VINEET GULATI201408.01 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRR (F) No.123 of 2014 -3- paying `15,000/- per month as interest on the debt, then how it can be held that he is not earning anything or is unable to pay `5000/-.
In no way, it can be held that grant of interim maintenance of `5000/- per month is excessive.
Otherwise also, revision petitioners are to show the illegality committed by the Courts below.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has not pointed any illegality committed by the Courts below while passing the judgments.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to show that how judgments passed by the Courts below are perverse.
From the perusal of the record, I find that no illegality has been committed by the Courts below while passing the judgments.
The judgments have been passed as per law and on the facts on record and findings have been given with sound reasoning.
Therefore, finding no merit, the present revision petition stands dismissed.
July 08, 2014 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE VINEET GULATI201408.01 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh