‘ HIGH COURT OF CHHAT'usGARx-I, BILASPUR V W346! No.945l2008 Q' PETITIONER Harish Kum‘ar Rai, aged. 22 yeam soxi of Shri SD Rm, res1dent of Green Park Colony, Jarhabhata Bllaspur Tehs11 and Elstnct Bllaspur (Chhathsgarh) (Plaimim Versus i RESPONDENTQ Smt Hemlata Sonwam, aged 19 3 years daughtcr of Shn Laxmx Prasad Sonwam res1dent of Vlllage Plpartaxm PS 8r. T611311 Kota D1stnct B1laspur (C G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - Apgearanc ' Shn Somnath Velma, Counsel for the petmoner 01w. 01mm (14.2.2008) SUNIL’KUMAR‘ SINHA,‘ J, Héam. _ ‘ This petifion is directed against the ordcr’dated 24.1.2008 passed in as. Nb.82-A/ 2007, by which, the Family cdurt, Bijaspur'has awarded a sum of Rs.2500/- per month as the amount of alimony underSection 24 ofthe Hindn Marriage Act. Léarned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order was passed in absence of the petiu'oner. He also submits that the alimony has been gmnted on higher side I have consniexed the pomts ralsed by learned counsel tor the peunoncr There 1s no proh1b1uon for a Court of law to pass an order m absence of any party therefore, the hrst pomt ra1sed by ‘ I learned counsel for the petmoner has no substance and the same ‘ ls turned down So far as the second pomt regardmg quantum 1s : ? 2 ( I _ x _ ‘ W.P. C N0.945£2008 v, ’ 1 ‘ ' (' ) g _ . 27 / . x ‘ L " 1‘» cEoncemed in the facts and cixjnmstances oi thls case {Rs 2500/ cannot bg sa1d to be a qll1antum on tbs mgher Slde _ ‘ " j worth mterference by th1s Court L I F g ¥ ‘ j The petmon has no ment and the same 1s dlsmlsscd In _’ imme. Sunil Kumar Sinha , ’ Jge K ‘ ud