Sanjay Singh vs Tejvinderjeet Kour
2022 Latest Caselaw 863 j&K

                                                                       Sr. No. 126



         HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                         AT JAMMU


                                                            Crl R No. 22/2022
                                                           CrlM No. 882/2022

Sanjay Singh                                        ...Appellant/Petitioner(s)

                     Through:- Mr. M.L. Gupta, Advocate.
                                 V/s

Tejvinderjeet Kour                                          ...Respondent(s)

                     Through:-



Coram:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
                                 ORDER

Revisional jurisdiction has been invoked by the petitioner seeking

quashment of order dated 20.04.2022 in terms where of the petitioner herein

being non-applicant before the Court below in the maintenance proceedings

instituted by the respondents herein has been directed to pay an interim

maintenance of Rs. 5000/- per month to the applicant/respondent herein till the

disposal of the main petition.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the trial Court while

granting the maintenance has overlooked the fact that the applicant/respondent

herein is putting up at her parental home and is receiving an amount of Rs.

50,000/-, earning on account of running of a tuition center as against the

earnings of the petitioner being a private school teacher at Rs. 10,000/- per

month.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

Admittedly, the order under challenge has been passed by way of an

interim maintenance by the Court below in favour of the respondent herein and

has to remain in operation till the disposal of the main maintenance petition

filed by the respondent herein.

Law is settled that the scope of revisional jurisdiction does not postulate

re-appreciation of evidence. A revision in law has been held to be not a right but

a procedural facility available to a party.

In view of the aforesaid position of law, the order under challenge as has

been noticed in the preceeding paras, is an interlocutory order granting interim

maintenance to the respondent herein till the final disposal of the main petition

and in law an interlocutory order which is passed at an immediate stage of the

proceedings for advancing the cause of justice till the final determination of the

rights between the parties cannot be made subject to the revisional jurisdiction.

A reference in this regard would be relevant and germane to the judgment

of the Apex Court passed in case titled as, "Amarnath Vs. State of Haryana"

reported in 1977 SCC (4) 137.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances noticed above and the legal

position aforesaid, the instant petition is held to be incompetent and is liable to

be dismissed.

Accordingly, the petition shall stand dismissed.

(JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE Jammu 27.05.2022 Renu

RENU BALA 2022.05.31 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document