Punjab and Haryana High Court: In a revision petition against the Trial Court’s order allowing maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘HMA’), H.S. Madaan, J. dismissed the challenge holding that even if a husband is a professional bagger, he is morally and legally liable to maintain the wife who is unable to maintain herself.
The instant revision petition was filed in furtherance of an application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act (‘HMA’) allowed by the Trial Court through order dated 14-2-2023 awarding maintenance during pendency of litigation at the rate of Rs 5,000 per month payable to the wife by her husband along with a further lump sum of Rs 5,500 as litigation expenses and Rs 500 per hearing. Aggrieved by the said order, the husband approached the Court through the instant revision petition.
The Court regarded the husband to be ‘an able-bodied person’ and commented that “even a manual labourer manages to earn Rs 500 or more per day”. It further added that keeping regard with the trend of rising prices and the basic needs getting costlier, the maintenance so awarded by the Trial Court could not be said to be on a higher side. It further added that the husband could not prove other means of earning or sufficiency of property available for survival of the wife.
The Court observed that “a husband has a moral and legal liability to maintain his wife unable to maintain herself, even if he is a professional bagger.” It found the Trial Court’s acceptance of application under Section 24 of HMA and grant of maintenance and other expenses justified. The Court said that the said order is well reasoned and detailed and does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. Thus, the Court dismissed the instant revision petition.
The Court commented on the limited revisional jurisdiction of the High Court and said that there is no reason to interfere with the said order based on facts and circumstances of this case.
[Sandeep v. Suman, 2023 SCC OnLine P&H 294, decided on 22-3-2023]
Order by: Justice H.S. Madaan
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner: Advocate Gurmeet Kaur.
I can read it states BAGGER, but by nature of statement can someone please throw some light on the word bagger or is it begger ?