Sukhvir Singh vs Sukhpreet Kaur @ Soni

M.M.S. Bedi, J.—Husband-Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated March 11, 2011 passed by Additional District Judge u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, (for short ''the Act'') granting interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 3300/- per month to the wife and Rs. 2200/- per month to her daughter w.e.f. the date of application i.e. August 23, 2010 besides litigation expenses of Rs. 2200/-.

Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the marriage of the Petitioner with to Respondent was a love marriage which has turned sore. It is submitted that the Petitioner is not earning anything. Simultaneously it has been argued that the Petitioner is ready for one time settlement and is ready to keep the custody of the minor child and maintain her with the help of his parents and grand-parents. It has been submitted that it is the Respondent wife who is trying to take advantage of her own wrong. She has deserted the Petitioner and wants to grab money by seeking maintenance.

I have heard counsel for the Petitioner and taken into consideration all the circumstances. The interim order u/s 24 of the Act cannot be interfered with as it has been passed after taking into consideration all the relevant material produced before him. So far as the prayer of the Petitioner that he wants to have one time settlement to cut-short the litigation, it is ordered that the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track) Bathinda, shall make earnest endeavour to get the matter amicably settled by adopting all the provisions of mediation and conciliation. In case a request is made to the Court for referring the matter to the Lok Adalat or Mediation and Conciliation Centre, the said request will be accepted and an attempt would be made for conciliation. However, no ground is made out for interfering in the order of interim maintenance.

Disposed of with the above observations.