Anil Kumar Sharma vs Aditya Vashishth

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(P&H) 849

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
ARCHANA PURI
Anil Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Aditya Vashishth – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sachin Bansal and Ms. Arti Sharma, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. Ashok Kumar Sheokand and Mr. Mayur Sethi, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

Archana Puri, J.

1. Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 25.10.2021 passed by learned trial Court, whereby, an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, filed by the petitioner was dismissed.

2. The essential facts, as culled out from paper-book, are as follows:-

3. That, respondent No1. - Aditya Vashishth (who is petitioner before the trial Court) had filed a suit under Section 3 (b), 20 and 28 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, for maintenance, educational and marriage expenses and booking expenses for marriage expenses, medical expenses, read with Section 151 CPC.

4. Therein, primarily, it was asserted about petitioner-Anil Kumar Sharma not getting along with mother of respondent No.1, ever since the birth of the respondent No.1 and that the petitioner abandoned his wife and also two children, including respondent No.1. Both, the petitioner and mother of respondent No.1, are litigating between themselves for the last 29-30 years. Also, it is asserted therein, that now respondent No.1 is of 31 years of age, but still unemployed. Since, he has attained the marriageable age, therefore, he is entitled for claiming marriage expenses from petiti