Poonam Khanna Vs V.P. Sharma : 2012 Cri.L.J. 1827 : 2012 (3) CivCC 778 : 2012 (4) Crimes 236 : (2012) 3 AICLR 176 : 2012 (1) DMC 829 : 2012 (2) HLR 41 : 2012 (3) RCR (Crl) 46 : 2012 (2) JCC 959 : 2012 (2) LRC 251 (Del)
Section 125-Award of Interim maintenance-Cancellation on ground that required material may be placed before court by husband later on in future-Petition to quash order-Court below observed that there is no mode of recovery, if later on it is found that wife has sufficient means to maintain herself-Wife during cross-examination in petition under s. 125 of CrPC on behalf of her son deposed that she was living on mercy of relatives and friends, however failed to name even a single person from whom she had taken debt or loan-ITR till 2007-2008 showing income of wife is living partially self owned house whose monthly rental is Rs. 80,000 whereas husband is living in a rented house in an unauthorized colony whose rental is Rs. 8,000 per month-Even parties are required to lead evidence regarding settlement arrived between them-Impugned order warrants no interference-Petition dismissed.
Held : Another settlement was executed on 02.04.2003 which was ultimately registered. Only difference between vis-a-vis previous settlement was that respondent reduced his share in the property C-18, Shivalik from 50 per cent to 45 per cent. On 03.05.2003, the divorce obtained by mutual consent in terms of settlement dated 02.04.2003 and petitioner withdrew her case in the guardianship court and petition under Section 125 Cr. P.C. on behalf of his son. The joint petition for mutual consent divorce, statement on oath as well as final order expressly stipulating that the petitioner shall not claim any maintenance through rest of the life.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge has recorded his opinion that parties are required to prove that whether the settlement arrived at between them was only illusory and sufficient arrangements not made for the future maintenance of the wife or that whatever wife is unable to maintain herself or whether the husband has sufficient means or not. To this effect, parties are required to lead evidence. The petitioner during her cross-examination in petition under Section 125 Cr. P.C. on behalf of her son deposed that she was living on the mercy of the relatives, friends, however failed to name even a single person from whom she had taken debt or loan.