IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN

th

ON THE 11 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. PETITION No. 6756 of 2025 BENI SINGH CHOUHAN AND OTHERS Versus SONAM CHOUHAN AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Naveen Giri Goswami - Advocate for the petitioner.

ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 14.10.2025, thereby granting interim maintenance to the respondents in proceedings under Section 19 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956.

2. The trial Court has granted interim maintenance to the respondents to the tune of Rs. 8000/- i.e. Rs. 5000/- to respondent No. 1 who is daughter in law of the petitioner and Rs. 3000/- to the respondent No. 2 who is grand daughter of the petitioner. The respondents have filed application under Section 19 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. The wife and daughter of deceased Abhishek, who was the son of the present petitioner, has expired in the year 2022 leaving behind the respondent No. 1, who was aged around 24 years, and respondent No. 2, who was aged around 2 years at that time.

3. It is vehemently contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No. 1, along with her daughter, resided for some time in the house of the petitioner, but thereafter, being misled by her maternal family members, she had of her own volition proceeded to reside with her parents and other family members at another place. Therefore, the petitioners are not bound to maintain the respondent No. 1. It is further argued that the petitioners are not having sufficient means to pay the amount of maintenance to the respondents.

4. Upon hearing counsel for the petitioner and on consideration of documents placed on record, it is seen that the respondent has contended that the petitioners have agricultural land to the tune of area 3.837 hectares and apart from that, they are also occupying the land area of 1.402 hectares, which had been received by deceased Abhishek in family partition in the year 2018. It is the assertion of the respondents that apart from their own land, the petitioners are also cultivating the land of the deceased husband of respondent No. 1, who was son of the present petitioners.

5. In the reply filed before the trial court, the petitioners did not deny that they are not in possession of the land in the share of the deceased Abhishek, but have stated that the respondents can come and live and cultivate the land in the name of the deceased husband.

6. In view of the aforesaid assertion of the respondent, this court does not find any error in the order passed by the trial court. More so, when the petitioners do not deny to be in possession of the land which has fallen in the share of deceased Abhishek.

7. Resultantly, the petition is dismissed. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the final disposal of the case under Section 19 of the Act of 1956, and make endeavor to decide the same within nine months. It is further observed that the observations contained in this order are only prima- facie observations, and would not be read to the prejudice of the petitioners at the time of final adjudication of the case.

(VIVEK JAIN)

JUDGE