IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY

COURTS, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

H.M.A. PETITION NO.____ OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG

S/0 SHRI RAJENDER PRASAD GARG
R/0 H.NO.G-II/26, GROUND FLOOR,
GALI NO.32, RAJAPURI, UTTAM NAGAR,
NEW DELHI-110059 …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG

W/0 SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG
D/0 SHRI RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA
R/0 HOUSE NO.128/1, INDRA COLONY,
ROHTAK, (HARYANA) …RESPONDENT

P.S.: DABRI

PETITION FOR RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL

RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE
ACT, 1955 (NO.25 OF 1955)

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the marriage between the parties

according to Hindu Rites and Ceremonies

on 18 T H January, 2013 at Maharaja

Agrasen Bhawan, M-Block, Vikaspuri, New

Delhi-110018. The marriage between the

petitioner and respondent was a simple

 dowryless marriage and all the expenses

regarding the marriage were borne by

the father of the petitioner. No dowry

demand was ever been made by the

petitioner and his family members at

any point of time. An affidavit duly

attested is filed with this petition.

2. That the status, age and place of

residence of the parties to the

petition at the time of marriage and at

the time of filing the present petition

were/was as follows:

BEFORE MARRIAGE
STATUS AGE PLACE OF
RESIDENCE

HUSBAND HINDU 26 YRS H.NO.K-77, MAIN

BACHELOR
SOM BAZAR ROAD,
RAJAPURI,OPPOSITE
SECTOR-5 DWARKA,
UTTAM NAGAR,
NEW DELHI-110059

WIFE HINDU 22 YRS HOUSE NO.128/1,

VIRGIN INDRA COLONY,
ROHTAK, (HARYANA)

AT THE TIME OF FILING

 THE PRESENT PETITION

STATUS AGE PLACE OF

RESIDENCE

HUSBAND HINDU 29 YRS H.NO.G-II/26,

MARRIED GROUND FLOOR,
GALI NO.32,
RAJAPURI, UTTAM
NAGAR, NEW
DELHI-110059

WIFE HINDU 25 YRS HOUSE NO.128/1,

MARRIED INDRA COLONY,
ROHTAK, (HARYANA

3. That after solemnization of the

marriage the respondent was brought to

her matrimonial home by petitioner

where both the parties lived together

as husband and wife and consummated

their marriage. One female child namely

BHOOMI was born out of this wedlock on

25.02.2014 and the said female child in

the care and custody of the respondent.

4. That from the very first day of the

marriage the behaviour of respondent

was very cruel towards the petitioner

and his family members. After

solemnization of marriage respondent

always used to visit at her parental

home without the consent of the

petitioner as well as his family

members.

5. That after some days of solemnization

of marriage the respondent quarreled

with the petitioner and misbehaved with

him and taunted the petitioner that she

is not liking the petitioner as she did

not want to marry with the petitioner.

6. That the respondent is a short tampered

lady who used to quarrel with the

petitioner and his family members on

regular basis and also did not pay any

respect to the elders and other guests

who used to visit the matrimonial home.

7. That the entire household work was done

by the mother of the petitioner and the

respondent did not take her

responsibility of being a wife or a

daughter-in-law of her family.

8. That the respondent pressurized the

petitioner that she wants to do the job

as she is a qualified lady and also

taunted the petitioner that he is only

10 t h Class passed and also said that you

are going to ruin my future to keep me

in the surroundings of the house and

the respondent also taunted saying

that, “TU TO MERE LAYAK BHI NAHIN HAI

AUR MERI SHHADI TERE SAATH JABARDASTI

KAR DI GAYE HAI”.

9. That the clothes of the respondent are

also washed by the mother of the

petitioner and even after this the

respondent did not pay respect to her

mother-in-law, the respondent several

times started quarrel with her mother-

 in-law on the simple reason of washing

clothes not in a proper manner which

respondent like and created a scene in

the family for this reason also.

10. That the petitioner is a loving,

faithful, devoted and caring husband

towards the respondent and always

provide utmost love, affection and care

to her during her stay at her

matrimonial house and always fulfilled

all her needs and requirements as per

his capacity. It is pertinent to

mention here that the respondent was

kept by the family members of the

petitioner as their daughter.

11. That on 14.02.2013 the petitioner went

to the parental house of the respondent

to attend the marriage of his brother-

in-law namely Sumit in Rohtak,

(Haryana). In that marriage also the

respondent and her brother-in-law

(Jija) also taunted the petitioner and

 used abusive language and tried to

insult the petitioner in front of the

relatives who are present in the

marriage by saying that, “TU TO ISKE

LAYAK NAHIN THA, TERI ISSE SHADI KAISE

HO GAYE”. On this the petitioner

objected for the same and told the

respondent why you are insulting me in

front of the relatives and why your

Jija is also using abusive words

towards me, on this the respondent told

that he is making fun with you don’t

mind. Thereafter the petitioner ignored

the same because he does not want to

spoil his married life and also the

atmosphere of the marriage of his

brother-in-law.

12. That the petitioner used to go with the

respondent at her parental house when

she asked as well as on the occasions

and festivals and also given full

respect to his in-laws at the parental

house of the respondent, but the

 respondent changed his behaviour and

always used to talk in a rude manner

with the petitioner and his family

members. The petitioner always

tolerated all the acts and utmost

cruelties of the respondent because he

does not want to spoil his married

life.

13. That the petitioner as well as his

family members also provided proper

love, affection and medical care to the

respondent during her pregnancy period

and also borne all the expenses of the

delivery and after the delivery and the

respondent was provided proper medical

care and full bed rest as per advice of

the doctor. It is pertinent to mention

here that that the petitioner and his

family members were very happy after

the birth of the minor female child

namely BHOOMI and provided proper love

and affection to her.

14. That despite providing all the love,

care and affection by the petitioner

and his family members to the

respondent, the respondent never

changed her behaviour and used to

quarrel with the petitioner and his

family members on very pity issues.’

15. That during her stay at her matrimonial

house, the respondent used to busy in

talking on mobile phone with her

parents, relative i.e. Jija and sister.

When the petitioner objected about the

same and asked why the respondent is

doing so, then the respondent used to

say that, “TERI AUR TERI BAAP KI KAMAI

KO AISE HI UDAONGI AUR TU MERA KUCHH

BHI NAHIN BIGAD SAKTA” .

16. That on 26.10.2014 in the evening at

about 4.00 PM the respondent quarreled

with the petitioner and his family

members and put pressure upon the

petitioner saying that I do not want to

 live with your parents or in joint

family and also saying that, “MEIN TERE

MA BAAP AUR TERE PARIVAR KI SAKAL BHI

DEKHNA PASAND NI KARTI AUR MUJE ALAG

MAKAN LEKAR DE”.

17. That on this the petitioner showed his

inability as he is not financially

strong because he is running a mobile

shop on rent and earning a meager

income and is not able to provide the

respondent a separate accommodation. On

this, the respondent became adamant and

started quarrelling and using abusive

words towards the petitioner and his

family members. On the same day the

petitioner called his mother-in-law and

told her to make understand her

daughter why she is quarrelling with

the petitioner and his family members

on unnecessary issue and trying to ruin

his matrimonial life.

18. That on 27.10.2014 the mother-in-law of

the petitioner asked the petitioner to

take the respondent at her Nana’s house

at Uttam Nagar, New Delhi, because her

mother was there. Thereafter the

petitioner went along with the

respondent to her Nana’s house and

there the respondent and her mother and

other family members of the respondent

used abusive language and insulted the

petitioner in a very rude manner and

the mother of the respondent threatened

the petitioner to kill him and his

family members and the respondent went

away with her mother to her parental

house in Rohtak, (Haryana) by stating

that, “HUM ROHTAK KE BADMAS HAIN, HUM

TUJE AUR GHAR WALON KO NAHIN

CHHODENGE”.

19. That the petitioner tried his level

best to bring back the respondent at

her matrimonial house because he does

not to ruin his matrimonial life and

the future of his minor daughter. On

this in the month of December, 2014 one

Panchayat was held between the

petitioner and respondent and their

family members at the house of Nana of

the respondent at Uttam Nagar, New

Delhi, and in this Panchayat the

respondent confession her guilt and

promised not to repeat such rude

behaviour towards the petitioner and

his family members in future and live

peacefully her matrimonial life with

the petitioner. On the same time the

respondent and her family members

pressurized the petitioner and his

family members and put a demand to

arrange the separate accommodation for

the respondent because she does not

want to live with the other family

members of the petitioner. On this the

family members of the petitioner

arranged one separate accommodation

 only to save the matrimonial life of

their son and agreed to shift them at

some other place for some time only to

save their matrimonial life.

20. That on 07.02.2015 the petitioner and

the respondent started separately along

with their daughter at House No.K-77,

Som Bazaar Rajapuri Road, Uttam Nagar,

New Delhi. It is further submitted that

for few days the behaviour of the

respondent towards the petitioner was

good but later on she started again

showing her colours and used to quarrel

with the petitioner and raised

unnecessary demands towards the

petitioner. On this the petitioner

again showed his inability because he

is not financially strong to fulfill

all her unnecessary demands and

requested to manage what I am earning

because I have also to look after my

daughter along with you. On this the

respondent started using filthy and

 abusive language towards the petitioner

saying that, “MAIN TO KANGLE KE PALLE

PAD GAI, KISI AMIR LADKE SE SHAADI

KARTI TU MOJ KARTI, TU TO DASVI FAIL

HAI”.

21. That the petitioner tried his level

best to make understand the respondent

by stating that I have already

fulfilled your all demands to reside

separately, now you are making

unnecessary demands only to make issue

and quarreled with me.

22. That the respondent used to threaten

the petitioner by locking herself in

the bathroom and also tried to commit

suicide after jumping from the roof and

threatened the petitioner and his

family members to implicate in false

dowry cases and wants to ruin the

married life.
23. That on 21.04.2015 the respondent left

the company of the petitioner without

his consent and permission with her

real brother namely Vivek and cousin

brother namely Ankit and also

threatened the petitioner to implicate

him and his family members in false

dowry case. The respondent also left

her matrimonial house by stating that,

”MAIN TERE SE RISTA TOD KAR JA RAHI

HOON AB TO COURT MEIN MILENGE”.

24. That when the petitioner contacted the

respondent several times through phones

and requested her to come back to her

matrimonial home but the respondent

refused to come to her matrimonial home

every time and also send one SMS on the

mobile phone of the petitioner by

saying that, “NISHA TU PEHLE HI MAR

GAYE THE AAJ SE AAPKI BETE BHOOMI BHI

MAR GAYE”. The petitioner also tried to

contact the respondent and her parents

 to save his matrimonial house but every

time they also not gave satisfactory

reply and dropped the phone as and when

he called her and also threatened to

implicate him and his family members in

false dowry case if he call again or

tried to contact her.

25. That the respondent has taken all the

dowry articles including gold and

silver ornaments and cash from the

possession of the petitioner on

21.04.2015 when she left the company of

petitioner from rented accommodation.

26. That the petitioner requested the

respondent through telephonically and

requested her to join the company of

the petitioner but the respondent

flatly denied to join the company of

the petitioner and warned the

petitioner to see in the court or

police station.
27. That due to the dispute arose between
the petitioner and respondent, the
parents of the petitioner told
petitioner to vacate the premises which
they have given him to reside and there
after the petitioner vacated the
premises and started to reside at
rented accommodation at the above given
address since June, 2015 as he also
vacated the shop where he was doing the
business of mobile repairing due to
financial loss as well as due to rude
and adamant behaviour of respondent due
to which the matrimonial life of
petitioner was disturbed and not able
to do the business property as such the
petitioner closed the said business in
the month of July, 2015 and presently
now petitioner is working with Knight
Ranger Security Service Pvt. Ltd.
Sector-12, Dwarka, New Delhi, as
Marketing Executive and getting salary
of Rs,9,048/- per month.

28. That the respondent is not willing to

join petitioner despite so many
positive approached done by the
petitioner. The reason behind that it
well known to the respondent. The
efforts so far made by the petitioner
 to bring the respondent back to her
matrimonial home went in futile.

29. That the respondent/wife has without

any reasonable and probable cause and
excuse has withdrawn from the
society of the petitioner/husband
w.e.f. 21.04.2015. There has been a
withdrawal by respondent/wife from the
conjugal relationship, though it is the
duty of the spouses to afford to each
other matrimonial company.

30. That the petition is not presented in

collusion with the respondent.

31. That there has not been unnecessary or

improper delay in filing petition.

32. That there is no other legal ground why

the relief as prayed herein by the

petitioner should not be granted in

favour of petitioner and against the

respondent as per Court of Law.

33. That there has not been any case

pending between the parties, in any

Court anywhere in respect of conjugal

rights.

34. That the petitioner and respondent last

resided together at K-77, Som Bazaar

Road, Rajapuri, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-

110045. The petitioner is presently

residing at the above given addresses,

within the local limits of the ordinary

original jurisdiction of this Hon’ble

Court, hence this Hon’ble Court has

territorial jurisdiction to try,

entertain and decide present petition.

35. That the fixed Court fee has been

affixed to the plaint.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully

prayed before this Hon’ble Court that

decree for Restitution of conjugal rights

 may kindly be passed in favour of the

petitioner against the respondent, in the

interest of justice.

Any other or further order/s which this

Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper may

also be passed in favour of the petitioner

and against the respondent.

NEW DELHI:
DATED: 02.09.2015 PETITIONER

(ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG)

THROUGH

(LPS & ASSOCIATES)

ADVOCATES
CHAMBER NO.745,
DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX,
SECTOR-10, DWARKA,
NEW DELHI-110075
VERIFICATION:
 I, ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG, the above named

petitioner do hereby state and verify on

solemn affirmation that the contents of Para

No.1 to 29 of the above petition are true

and correct to my knowledge and Para No.30

to 35 are based on the information received

and believed to be true by him. Last Para

is PRAYER to this Hon’ble Court.

Verified at NEW DELHI on this 02 N D day

of SEPTEMBER, 2015

PETITIONER

(ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG)

 IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURTS, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

H.M.A. PETITION NO.____ OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG …RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

I, ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

S/0 SHRI RAJENDER PRASAD GARG, R/0 HOUSE NO.G-

II/26, GROUND FLOOR, GALI NO.32, RAJAPURI,

UTTAM NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110059 do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1. That I am the Petitioner in the

accompanying Petition Under Section 9 of

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and well

conversant with the facts and

circumstances of the case, as such

competent to swear the present

affidavit.
1. That the marriage between the deponent and

the respondent was solemnized on 18 T H

January, 2013 at Maharaja Agrasen

Bhawan, M-Block, Vikaspuri, New Delhi-

110018.

2. That the deponent and respondent are

residing separately since 21 s t April,

2015.

3. That the petition is not presented in

collusion with the respondent.

4. That the accompanying petition Under

Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for

Restitution of Conjugal Rights has been

drafted by my Counsel under my

instructions. The same has been read

over and explained to me in my

vernacular language and I say that the

same is true and correct to the best of

my knowledge and belief.

5. That the contents of the accompanying

petition under Section 9 of Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 may kindly be read as

part and parcel to this affidavit as the

same have not been repeated herein for

the sake of brevity.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

Verified at New Delhi on this 02 n d day of

SEPTEMBER, 2015 that the contents of my

affidavit are true and correct to the best

of my knowledge and belief and nothing

material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT
 IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURTS, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

H.M.A. PETITION NO.____ OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG …RESPONDENT

MEMO OF PARTIES

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG

S/0 SHRI RAJENDER PRASAD GARG
R/0 H.NO.G-II/26, GROUND FLOOR,
GALI NO.32, RAJAPURI, UTTAM NAGAR,
NEW DELHI-110059 …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG

W/0 SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG
D/0 SHRI RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA
R/0 HOUSE NO.128/1, INDRA COLONY,
ROHTAK, (HARYANA) …RESPONDENT

NEW DELHI:
DATED: 02/09/2015 FILED BY:

(LPS & ASSOCIATES)

ADVOCATES
CHAMBER NO.745,
DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX,
SECTOR-10, DWARKA,
NEW DELHI-110075
 IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURTS, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

H.M.A. PETITION NO.____ OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG …RESPONDENT

INDEX
SL.NO PARTICULARS PAGES C/FEE

1. MEMO OF PARTIES.

2. PETITION U/S 9 OF HINDU

MARRIAGE ACT, ALONGWITH
sUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT

3. LIST OF DOCUMENTS ALONG

WITH DOCUMENTS

4. VAKALATNAMA.

NEW DELHI:
DATED: 02/09/2015 FILED BY:

(LPS & ASSOCIATES)

ADVOCATES
CHAMBER NO.745,
DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX,
SECTOR-10, DWARKA,
NEW DELHI-110075
 IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURTS, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

H.M.A. PETITION NO.____ OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG …RESPONDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

1. Original Marriage Photographs.

2. Copy of Marriage Card.

3. Photocopy of Aadhar Card of Petitioner.

4. Copy of Rent Agreement dated 29.08.2015

5. Any other document/s with the permission

of this Hon’ble Court.

NEW DELHI:
DATED : 02/09/2015 FILED BY:

(LPS & ASSOCIATES)

ADVOCATES
CHAMBER NO.745,
DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX,
SECTOR-10, DWARKA,
NEW DELHI-110075
 IN THE COURT OF MS. ASHA MENON, PRINCIPAL
JUDGE, FAMILY COURTS, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

H.M.A. PETITION NO.580 OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG …RESPONDENT

AMENDED MEMO OF PARTIES

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG

S/0 SHRI RAJENDER PRASAD GARG
R/0 H.NO.RZ-69, SECOND FLOOR,
RAJ NAGAR PART-I, PALAM COLONY,
NEW DELHI-110045 …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG

W/0 SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG
D/0 SHRI RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA
R/0 HOUSE NO.128/1, INDRA COLONY,
ROHTAK, (HARYANA) …RESPONDENT

NEW DELHI:
DATED : /07/2016 FILED BY:

(LPS & ASSOCIATES)

ADVOCATES
CHAMBER NO.745,
DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX,
SECTOR-10, DWARKA,
NEW DELHI-110075
 IN THE COURT OF MS. ASHA MENON, PRINCIPAL
JUDGE, FAMILY COURTS, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

H.M.A. PETITION NO.580 OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG …RESPONDENT

D.O.H.: 07.07.2016

REPLY ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER TO THE

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 24 OF H.M.A. FOR
GRANT OF MAINTENANCE FILED BY THE
RESPONDENT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:

1. That the respondent has not come to this

Hon’ble Court with clean hands, the

present application deserves to be

dismissed because the respondent is a

guilty of suppressio of facts and

suggesio falsi.
2. That the present application of the

respondent is liable to be dismissed

with heavy costs because the respondent

Nisha Garg, wedded wife of the

petitioner left the matrimonial home on

her own without any rhymes and reason

and without the permission and consent

of the petitioner and did not turn up to

her matrimonial house as well as to his

life inspite of the sincere efforts on

the part of the petitioner.

3. That the present application is again

deserves to be dismissed with heavy

costs on the ground that the averments

made in the application are based on

misleading facts.

4. That the petitioner has been a very

loving, faithful and caring husband

towards the respondent and has always

given the respondent a status of wife by

keeping her high esteem of happiness and

 always fulfilled all her day-to-day

needs and requirements according to his

capacity.

5. That the respondent has not filed the

written statement/reply of the petition

and only by filing this application to

mislead this Hon’ble Court by mentioning

the false and fabricated facts even to

harass the petitioner as well to delay

the present matter.

6. That the respondent is giving tuitions and

earning handsome monthly income of

Rs.10,000/ which is much more sufficient

to maintain herself. On the other hand,

the petitioner is working in Knight

Ranger Security Service Pvt. Ltd., at

Sector-12, Dwarka, New Delhi and getting

salary of Rs.8,252/- per month and only

hardly manage to maintain himself

because due to the act and cruelties

committed by the respondent, the

 petitioner was also debarred by his

parents and the petitioner is residing

at the rented accommodation.

7. That due to the cruel act and behaviour of

the respondent, the petitioner is still

ready to save his matrimonial life filed

the present petition. On the other hand,

the respondent threatened the petitioner

and his family members to implicate them

in false dowry case and other

litigations.

PARAWISE REPLY:

1&2. That the contents of Para Nos.1 and 2 of

the application are matter of record,

hence needs no reply.

3&4. That the contents of Para Nos.3 and 4 of

the application are false, wrong and

hence denied. It is submitted by the

petitioner that the acts and cruelties

committed by the respondent as mentioned

in the main petition be read as part and

 parcel to the reply of these Paras as

the same have not been repeated herein

for the sake of brevity. It is further

submitted that preliminary objections of

this reply be read as part and parcel to

the reply of these Paras.

5. That the contents of Para No.5 of the

application are false, wrong and hence

denied. It is submitted by the

petitioner that the petitioner is

working in Knight Ranger Security

Service Pvt. Ltd., at Sector-12, Dwarka,

New Delhi and getting salary of

Rs.8,252/- per month and only hardly

manage to maintain himself because due

to the act and cruelties committed by

the respondent, the petitioner was also

debarred by his parents and the

petitioner is residing at the rented

accommodation. (Photocopy of the Salary

Slip is annexed herewith). It is further

submitted that the respondent mentioned

 in her Income Affidavit regarding the

income of the petitioner is totally

false and fabricated.

6. That the contents of Para No.6 of the

application are false, wrong and hence

denied. It is submitted by the

petitioner that the respondent is giving

tuitions and earning handsome monthly

income of Rs.10,000/ which is much more

sufficient to maintain herself and her

child, even she is earning more than the

petitioner.

7. That the contents of Para No.7 of the

application are false, wrong and hence

denied. It is submitted by the

petitioner that the contents of the main

petition be read as part and parcel to

the reply of this Para as the same have

not been repeated herein for the sake of

brevity. It is further submitted that

the respondent has even not filed the

written statement/reply of the main

 petition even the statutory period of 30

days have been elapsed and with only to

delay the present matter, in these

circumstances the defence of the

respondent may kindly be struck off.

8. That the contents of Para No.8 of the

application are false, wrong and hence

denied. It is submitted by the

petitioner that the petitioner is

working in Knight Ranger Security

Service Pvt. Ltd., at Sector-12, Dwarka,

New Delhi and getting salary of

Rs.8,252/- per month and only hardly

manage to maintain himself and living

his life in a very simple manner. It is

further submitted that the petitioner

has disclosed his real income and filed

his salary slip along with this reply

also.

9. That the contents of Para No.9 of the

application are false, wrong and hence

denied. It is submitted by the

 petitioner that the respondent is giving

tuitions and earning handsome monthly

income of Rs.10,000/ which is much more

sufficient to maintain herself, as such

she is not entitled for any maintenance

as claimed by her in Para under reply.

10. That the contents of Para No.10 of the

application are false, wrong and hence

denied. It is submitted by the

petitioner that the respondent has not

filed the written statement/reply of the

petition and only by filing this

application to mislead this Hon’ble

Court by mentioning the false and

fabricated facts even to harass the

petitioner as well to delay the present

matter.

11. That the contents of Para No.11 of the

application are false, wrong and hence

denied. It is submitted by the

petitioner that the respondent is giving

 tuitions and earning handsome monthly

income of Rs.10,000/ which is much more

sufficient to maintain herself, as such

she is not entitled for any maintenance

as claimed by her in Para under reply.

It is further submitted that even the

petitioner is ready to keep and maintain

the respondent in her matrimonial house

just to save his matrimonial life if the

respondent will mend her behaviour and

stopped doing cruelties and atrocities

committed against the petitioner.

Prayer clause of the application is

also wrong and denied. The respondent is

not entitled for any relief as prayed in

the prayer clause.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed

that the application of the respondent may

kindly be dismissed with heavy costs, in the

interest of justice.
 Pass any other or further order/s which

this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in

favour of the petitioner and against the

respondent.

NEW DELHI:
DATED : 28.06.2016 PETITIONER

(ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG)

THROUGH

(LPS & ASSOCIATES)

ADVOCATES
CHAMBER NO.745,
DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX,
SECTOR-10, DWARKA,
NEW DELHI-110075
VERIFICATION:

I, ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG, the petitioner, do

hereby verify that the contents of Para No.1
to 7 of the Preliminary Objections and the
contents of Para No.1 to 11 of the Reply on
Merits of the above Reply are true and correct
to the best of my knowledge and belief and
last Para is PRAYER to this Hon’ble Court.

Verified at New Delhi on this 28 T H day of

JUNE, 2016
PETITIONER
 IN THE COURT OF MS. ASHA MENON, PRINCIPAL
JUDGE, FAMILY COURTS, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

H.M.A. PETITION NO.580 OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG …PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. NISHA GARG …RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

I, ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG S/0 SHRI RAJENDER

PRASAD GARG R/0 H.NO.RZ-69, SECOND FLOOR, RAJ

NAGAR PART-I, PALAM COLONY, NEW DELHI-110045,

do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as

under:

1. That I am Petitioner in the above said

case and well conversant with the facts

and circumstances of the case as such

competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That the accompanying reply to the

application Under Section 24 of Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 has been drafted by

my Counsel under my instructions. The

 same has been read over and explained to

me in vernacular language which is true

and correct to the best of my knowledge

and belief. The contents of the

accompanying reply may kindly be read as

part and parcel to this affidavit as the

same have not been repeated herein for

the sake of brevity.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

Verified at NEW DELHI on this 28 T H day of

JUNE, 2016 that the contents of my above

affidavit are true and correct to the best of

my knowledge and belief and nothing material

has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT