1 CGHC010214452026 2026:CGHC:35459 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3104 of 2026 1 - Sardarni Surjeet Kaur Wd/o Sardar Surjit Singh Hunjan, Aged About 78 Years Resident Of House No. 26/899 First Floor, Gurudwara Road, Govind Nagar, P. S. -Civil Line, Pandritarai, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Kulvinder Singh Hunjan Son Of Late Sardar Surjit Singh Hunjan, Aged About 51 Years Resident Of House No. 26/899 First Floor, Gurudwara Road, Govind Nagar, P. S. -Civil Line, Pandritarai, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Arvinder Singh Hunjan (Boby) Son Of Late Sardar Surjit Singh Hunjan, Resident Of House No. 26/899 Ground Floor, Gurudwara Road, Govind Nagar, P. S. -Civil Line, Pandritarai, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners :- Mr. Prakhar Dutt, Advocate For Respondent ;- Ms. Aditi Parakh, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 Order On Board 12.08.2026 1. The petitioner has called in question the order dated 30.03.2026 passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal, whereby the order dated 19.12.2025 passed by the Maintenance Tribunal was modified. 2. Following reliefs have been prayed in this petition:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the records pertaining to the case from the respondent authorities. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quash the impugned order dated 30.03.2026 (Annexure P/1). 10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which may be deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case including cost of litigation.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Appellate Tribunal has committed an error in interfering with the well- reasoned order passed by the Maintenance Tribunal and in staying the execution of the order dated 19.12.2025 subject to the outcome of the civil suit. It is further submitted that the respondent and his family members had been creating nuisance and that the respondent has no right or share in the suit house, which, according to the petitioner, has 3 been willed in favour of petitioner No.2. On these grounds, it is submitted that the impugned order deserves to be quashed. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the order passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. It is submitted that the learned Appellate Tribunal has balanced the rights of the parties by modifying the order of the Maintenance Tribunal and directing payment of monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- and requiring the concerned parties to maintain due respect towards their mother. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. From a perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Appellate Tribunal has not completely set aside the order passed by the Maintenance Tribunal, but has modified the same by issuing appropriate directions, including payment of a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month towards maintenance and ensuring due respect to the mother. 7. In the opinion of this Court, the directions issued by the learned Appellate Tribunal are intended to balance the rights and obligations of the parties and do not call for any interference in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate any jurisdictional error, perversity or illegality in the impugned order warranting interference. 8. Accordingly, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the order 4 dated 30.03.2026 passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal. 9. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha