IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

241

*****

CRR (F) No. 257 of 2023

Date of Decision : 1.3.2023

Ashwin Singh

..... Petitioner

versus

Preeti Singh and another

..... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

Present:

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner

---

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA J. (ORAL):

This petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated

22.11.2022, passed by the Family Court, Gurugram, whereby an application

filed by the petitioner/husband for cross-examination of the respondent/wife,

has been declined.

2.

On 22.2.2023, notice of motion was issued to the respondents for

today by way of dasti process only. As per office report, dasti notices issued to

the respondents have not been received back served or otherwise.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to state

whether the respondents have been served by way of dasti process or not. He

does not even know whether the dasti notices were submitted to the trial Court

for affecting service. No report of service has been produced in Court. He has

only referred to petitioner’s undated affidavit, attested on 27.2.2023 at Nagpur,

which states that he has served notice upon the respondents, who are

petitioner’s wife and five years old son, residing at Gurugram, through whats-

app on Mobile phone number 09667213548 of respondent no.1 and e-mail ID

priti0709@gmail.com, preetisingh0709@gmail.com .

4.

On the basis of petitioner’s affidavit, it cannot be held that the

ASHWANI KUMAR

2023.03.03 19:58

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CRR (F) No. 257 of 2023

-2-

respondents have been duly served. Neither their phone number nor the e-mail

IDs are part of the record, nor the petitioner ever sought permission to serve the

respondents electronically through their e-mail or mobile phone numbers on

whats-app.

5.

Learned counsel, however, insists that the petition should be heard

today as the main case is listed for tomorrow before the Family Court for final

arguments, and it shall be rendered infructuous in case the petition is not

decided today and/or interim order of staying further proceedings before the

Family Court is not granted.

6.

On his insistence, the matter is being heard today.

7.

A perusal of the impugned order dated 22.11.2022 shows that the

respondent/wife’s evidence was closed by order of the Court and the case was

adjourned to 29.11.2022 for the petitioner’s evidence, whereupon the

application in question for cross-examination of the respondent/wife was filed.

8.

It is apparent on record that vide order dated 29.8.2019, the Family

Court, in order to settle all maintenance disputes between the parties at an early

date, had ordered that both the petitions shall in their evidence file only their

affidavits supported with documents, if any. On that basis, the parties filed their

respective affidavits and the Family Court proceeded to decide the maintenance

petition filed by the respondent/wife.

9.

While dismissing the application for cross-examination, the Family

Court observed that in the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. only the reason of

separation and income of the parties are to be seen which can be done on the

basis of affidavits furnished by the parties. So far as other averments/allegations

in the affidavits are concerned, they are not required to be looked into. On this

ASHWANI KUMAR

2023.03.03 19:58

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CRR (F) No. 257 of 2023

-3-

basis, the application was dismissed, and the matter was fixed for final

arguments. The impugned order passed by the Family Court does not suffer

from any illegality or error of law. Besides, the earlier order passed by the

Family Court dated 29.8.2019, laying down the procedure and ordering that the

maintenance petition is to be decided onl