Satbir Singh v. Smt. Bimla Devi

Smt. Bimla Devi ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. R.S.Chahar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. S.K.Bawa, Advocate, for the respondent. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The defendant is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby in a suit for maintenance under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, Rs.3000/- per month was awarded as maintenance to the respondent. The sole argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that his salary is Rs.7200/- per month and, therefore, payment of maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month is excessive. The Courts below have examined the entire evidence and found that younger sister of the appellant has already been married and his three brothers are living separately and are maintaining themselves. It may be noticed that at the most the defendant has liability to maintain his parents, but such liability to maintain his parents is not exclusively of the R.S.A.No.3061 of 2007 2 appellant, in view of the fact that he has other three brothers. As per the stand of the appellant his salary was Rs.7200/- per month. Now the recommendations of Sixty Pay Commission have been implemented, therefore, the salary of the appellant has got substantial increase as well. As per the learned counsel for the respondent, the salary of the appellant is about Rs.18000/- per month. In view of the said fact, I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, which may give rise to any substantial question of law for consideration of this Court in second appeal. Dismissed.

30.7.2009 Vimal (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE