Kavita Punjwani Vs. Satish Kumar Punjwani - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1046427
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnMar-06-2013
AppellantKavita Punjwani
RespondentSatish Kumar Punjwani
Excerpt:
cr.r.no.517/2012 6.3.2013 shri manohar dixit, counsel for the applicant. shri avinash zargar, counsel for the respondent. heard on admission. the applicant has challenged the order dated 12.12.2011 passed by the principal judge, family court, bhopal in miscellaneous criminal case no.243/2009 whereby the maintenance application under section 125 of cr.p.c filed by the applicant was dismissed. the facts of the case in short are that, the applicant has moved an application under section 125 of cr.p.c before the trial court that she was married to the respondent on 5.5.1992. the couple was blessed with two son sagar and sumit. both the son are residing with the respondent. the applicant was dealt with cruelty by the respondent and therefore, on 29.7.2005 she went to the house of her father. thereafter, some compromise proceedings took place but those could not succeed. ultimately, the applicant has moved an application under section 125 of cr.p.c.the respondent in his reply denied the allegations made by the applicant. he has specifically stated that there was no reason with the applicant for refusal to reside with the respondent. an amendment was made in the reply that vide decree dated 1.10.2010 the marriage of the applicant and the respondent was dissolved by the district court, datia. the learned principal judge, family court after considering the evidence adduced by the parties dismissed the application under section 125 of cr.p.c filed by the applicant. after considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that after leaving the house of the respondent the applicant did not move any forum to get any compromise or to get a divorce from the respondent. after five years of her desertion, she moved an application under section 125 of cr.p.c which was nothing but a counter blast to the divorce proceedings of the respondent. therefore, the application made by delay of five years cannot be accepted therefore, the allegations made by the applicant and the witnesses before the trial court were rightly disbelieved by the learned principal judge, family court. the applicant failed to prove a reasonable ground so that she could get maintenance without residing with the respondent. there is no illegality or perversity visible in the impugned order passed by the learned principal judge, family court, bhopal. consequently, there is no basis by which the revision filed by the applicant can be accepted therefore, the revision filed by the applicant kavita punjwani is hereby dismissed at motion stage. (n.k.gupta) judge bina
Judgment:

Cr.R.No.517/2012 6.3.2013 Shri Manohar Dixit, counsel for the applicant.

Shri Avinash Zargar, counsel for the respondent.

Heard on admission.

The applicant has challenged the order dated 12.12.2011 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.243/2009 whereby the maintenance application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C filed by the applicant was dismissed.

The facts of the case in short are that, the applicant has moved an application under section 125 of Cr.P.C before the trial Court that she was married to the respondent on 5.5.1992.

The couple was blessed with two son Sagar and Sumit.

Both the son are residing with the respondent.

The applicant was dealt with cruelty by the respondent and therefore, on 29.7.2005 she went to the house of her father.

Thereafter, some compromise proceedings took place but those could not succeed.

Ultimately, the applicant has moved an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.The respondent in his reply denied the allegations made by the applicant.

He has specifically stated that there was no reason with the applicant for refusal to reside with the respondent.

An amendment was made in the reply that vide decree dated 1.10.2010 the marriage of the applicant and the respondent was dissolved by the District Court, Datia.

The learned Principal Judge, Family Court after considering the evidence adduced by the parties dismissed the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C filed by the applicant.

After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that after leaving the house of the respondent the applicant did not move any forum to get any compromise or to get a divorce from the respondent.

After five years of her desertion, she moved an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C which was nothing but a counter blast to the divorce proceedings of the respondent.

Therefore, the application made by delay of five years cannot be accepted therefore, the allegations made by the applicant and the witnesses before the trial Court were rightly disbelieved by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court.

The applicant failed to prove a reasonable ground so that she could get maintenance without residing with the respondent.

There is no illegality or perversity visible in the impugned order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal.

Consequently, there is no basis by which the revision filed by the applicant can be accepted therefore, the revision filed by the applicant Kavita Punjwani is hereby dismissed at motion stage.

(N.K.Gupta) Judge bina