RSA No. 4210 of 2011. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 4210 of 2011. Date of Decision: 21.10.2011 *** Harbhajan Singh .. Appellant VS. Suman & Anr. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Gaurav Bhayyia, Advocate for the appellant. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The defendants-appellant has preferred the instant regular second appeal against the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below in a suit for maintenance filed by respondents, on the averments that they have been neglected by the defendant, who is husband and father respectively of respondents and they have no source to maintain themselves. The defendant was proceeded ex-parte before the learned trial Court. On the basis of evidence adduced by the plaintiffs, they were awarded maintenance to the tune of Rs.4000/- per month each from the date of filing of the suit. However, on an appeal preferred by the plaintiffs, the learned appellate Court below modified the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court and ordered to create a charge over the property of the appellant to the extent of his share, as reflected in the jamabandi (Ex.P3) placed on record. Dis-satisfied with the same the appellant has preferred the instant regular second appeal. Heard. It is apparent that the suit was initially contested by the defendant, but later he did not appear before the Court and was proceeded ex-parte. There is no dispute with regard to the relationship between the parties. In order to save the plaintiffs from starvation, who were socially neglected by the appellant, the learned trial Court awarded maintenance to RSA No. 4210 of 2011. 2 them. However, the learned trial Court failed to ensure the payment of maintenance amount to them. It has come on record that the appellant- defendant received share in the land owned by his father. Hence, as a resort to ensure the payment of maintenance allowance, the learned trial Court rightly created a charge upon the land only to the extent of the share of defendant in the land received by him from his father. In view of the above, the instant regular second appeal stands dismissed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE October 21,2011 Jiten