Civil Revision No. 6255 of 2008 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 6255 of 2008 Date of decision : 19.1.2010 Balwinder Singh ....Petitioner Versus Balwinder Kaur ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. R.P.Dudeja, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. G.S.Verma, Advocate for the respondent. S. D. ANAND, J. The petitioner-husband has a grievance with regard to the award of Rs.3000/- as interim maintenance in favour of the respondent-wife. Besides it, the further order was that the petitioner-husband shall also pay Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses to the respondent-wife. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues, at the very outset, that the petitioner-husband has raised a plea denying the averred relationship of husband and wife and thus, it was not appropriate on the part of the learned Trial Court to have allowed the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and awarded the maintenance aforementioned as interim maintenance. In that context, she further argues that father of the petitioner had already lodged a complaint with the police to the effect that the respondent- Civil Revision No. 6255 of 2008 -2- **** wife is falsely claiming to be the wife of the petitioner. Be that as it may, there is no escape from the fact that an able bodied husband is duty bound to maintain a wife who has no means of sustenance for self. The controversy about the inter-se relationship of parties would be adjudicated upon only after the parties have been afforded an opportunity to adduce evidence at the trial. The fixture of maintenance in only interim in character. The husband has not adduced any evidence on the file to prove the averment that the wife has independent income. The petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. However, this Court agrees with the learned counsel for the petitioner that it is a matter where the adjudication must follow at an early date, particularly when the petitioner herein has denied that the respondent is his wife. It is ordered, in the circumstances of the case, that learned Trial Court shall dispose of the main petition itself by or on 31.3.2010. This order would be required even otherwise because the petition is pending since the year 2006. The acknowledgment (of a copy of this order) issued by the concerned Judicial Officer shall be forwarded to the Registry of this Court. Learned Sessions Judge shall himself maintain a tab to ensure that the case is disposed of by afore-mentioned date. January 19, 2010 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE