MANDEEP SINGH v. BALJIT KAUR AND OTHERS
Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Bench: MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Punjab and Haryana judgment dated 2025-08-19. MANDEEP SINGH v. BALJIT KAUR AND OTHERS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
CRR(F) No. 1183 of 2025(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR(F) No. 1183 of 2025(O&M) Date of Order:19. 08. 2025 Mandeep Singh . Petitioner Versus Baljit Kaur and others .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Balbir Singh Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner. SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL, JUDGE CRM-32062 of 2025 1. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, the delay of 103 days in filing the revision petition is condoned. 2. CM stands disposed of. CRR(F) No. 1183 of 2025 3. Order dated 14. 01. 2025, of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Camp Court, Baba Bakala Sahib, has been challenged in this revision petition. Vide impugned order, learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, awarded a sum of Rs. 12,000/- per month to respondent no. 1-wife, Rs. 5,000/- per month each to respondent nos. 2 and 3 and Rs. 3,000/-per month to respondent no.
4 as interim maintenance from the date of the application besides Rs. 3300/- towards litigation expenses. 4. The only submission of learned counsel for the petitioner/husband is that gross pay of petitioner had been wrongly taken as CRR(F) No. 1183 of 2025(O&M) -2- Rs. 87,648/-. In fact, petitioner, who was employed in BSF was not earning more than Rs. 70,268/-, as per salary slip for the month of April, 2025, Annexure P-3. It was submitted that at the time when the application for interim maintenance was allowed, petitioner was serving in Jammu & Kashmir and was getting special allowances, on account of which his gross pay was Rs. 87,648/-. 5. The relationship of the parties is not in dispute, respondent is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and respondent nos. 2 to 4 are his minor children. It is not disputed that the petitioner is serving in BSF and is drawing salary income. He has no liabilities.
Even if it is accepted that his gross pay in November, 2024 had increased on account of special allowances due to his posting in sensitive area and that his pay was not more than Rs. 70,268/-, he would still be bound to maintain his wife and children to enable them to maintain a standard of living which is modestly consistent with his own status. The maintenance awarded should be sufficient to make provision for food, clothing, shelter, education, medical attendance and treatment etc. of the wife and the children, who have no source of income. 6. Considering the status in life of the petitioner, his actual income, the reasonable wants of the wife and the children and keeping in mind the sky rocketing prices of essential commodities, it does not appear that the award of Rs. 12,000/- per month to respondent no. 1-wife, Rs. 5,000/-per month each to respondent nos. 2 and 3 and Rs. 3,000/- per month to respondent no.
4 as interim maintenance from the date of application, is on the higher side. The interim maintenance allowance awarded is commensurate to the status and earnings of the petitioner and there is no CRR(F) No. 1183 of 2025(O&M) -3- ground to interfere. 7. Dismissed. 8. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE th 19 August, 2025 nt Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
Source: High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.