##PAGE1##

1

2026:CGHC:10470-DB

NAFR

Digitally signed

ALOK b Sy H A AL RO MK A HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

SHARMA Date:

2026.03.02

18:24:41 +0530

FA(MAT) No. 322 of 2025

1 - Narayan Uike S/o Kartik Uike Aged About 60 Years R/o Baihatola,

P.S. And Tahsil- Khairagarh, District : Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai,

Chhattisgarh

... Appellant(s)

versus

1 - Smt Gunja Uike W/o Late Pradeep Uike Aged About 28 Years Caste-

Mahar, R/o House No. 413, Ward No. 33, Kanharpuri, Rajnandgaon,

Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

2 - Minor Purvi Uike D/o Late Pradeep Uike Aged About 7 Years

Through Guardian Mother Smt. Gunja Uike, W/o Late Pradeep Uike,

R/o House No. 413, Ward No. 33, Kanharpuri, Rajnandgaon, Tahsil And

District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

... Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s) : Ms. Priyanka Rai, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

28/02/2026

2

1. The instant appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act,

1984, has been filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment

and decree dated 17.07.2025 passed by the learned Family Court,

Rajnandgaon, in Civil Suit No. 131-A/2024, whereby the application filed

by the respondents under Section 19 of the Hindu Adoption and

Maintenance Act, 1956, was partly allowed, and an amount of Rs.

1,000/- in favor of the present respondent No. 1 and Rs. 500/- in favor

of respondent No. 2 was granted as maintenance from the date of filing

of the application.

2. For the sake of convenience, the status of the parties as shown in

the said civil suit shall be referred to in the present appeal.

3. The present appellant is the defendants in the civil suit, and the

present respondents were the plaintiffs. The defendant is the father-in-

law of plaintiff No. 1. The husband of plaintiff No. 1, father of plaintiff No.

2, and son of the defendant, namely Pradeep Uikey, expired on

10.01.2017. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the son

of the defendant and plaintiff No. 1 was solemnized in the year 2015.

During the marriage, plaintiff No. 1 conceived, but unfortunately, her

husband died on 10.01.2017. After the death of her husband, she gave

birth to plaintiff No. 2. After the death of the husband of the plaintiff

No.1, the defendant allegedly began harassing her and teasing her for

giving birth to a female child. It is also alleged in the plaint that the

defendant was having evil eye upon the plaintiff No. 1, his behavior

3

deteriorated toward the plaintiffs, and ultimately they were thrown out by

the defendant from their matrimonial house. They have no source of

their livelihood and they started residing with the parents of the plaintiff

No. 1. The plaintiffs filed an application under Section 19 of the Hindu

Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, for grant of monthly maintenance

of Rs. 32,000/- from the defendant, as the defendant possessed the

joint family property property and earned from it. It was pleaded that the

defendant owned 5 acres of agricultural land, from which he was earing

Rs. 5 lakh per year. There is no source of income of the plaintiffs,

therefore, the maintenance amount should be granted in their favour.

5. The defendant denied the plaintiffs’ claim and contended that

plaintiff No. 1 had performed a love marriage with his son, therefore,

there was no reason to demand dowry from her. He has never treated

her with cruelty during the life time his son or even after the death. The

plaintiff No. 1 in order to obtain compassionate appointment left her

matrimonial house and started residing with her parents. All allegations

of harassment, teasing, or “evil eye” were false and baseless. The

defendant is ready to keept her with her matrimonial house but due to

adamant attitude of the plaintiff No.1 she is residing with her parents.

He also denied with the family property and any income from it.

6. The learned trial court framed issues and proceeded