This appeal was dismissed as it failed against the order granting interim maintenance of Rs. 6000/- to the respondent-wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, upheld based on the appellant's verified tax returns.
The appeal filing is dismissed, maintaining the order granting interim maintenance of Rs. 6000/- to the respondent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 21
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 385 of 2019
Appellant :- Nitish Agrawal Respondent :- Pragya Agrawal Counsel for Appellant :- Kuldeep Kumar
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Present appeal under Section 19 of the Family Court Act has been filed assailing the order dated 8.4.2019, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Fourth Fast Trick Court, Additional Family Court, Bulandshahr in proceedings under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Appellant, before this Court, is husband. He was married to opposite party on 12.2.2016 according to Hindu rites and customs. As matrimonial dispute arose between the parties, the opposite party is not residing with the appellant. Appellant filed a Matrimonial case under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. During pendency of the aforesaid case, an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the opposite party claiming interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month as well as one time lump sum litigation expenses of Rs.30,000/- and further Rs.1000/- towards conveyance for attending the court proceedings on each date. It was further stated in the application that the appellant and his family was harassing the opposite party for demand of more dowry. Further, it was stated that she is expecting a baby from the aforesaid marriage.
The appellant contested the aforesaid application and
stated that he was running a small agency of Bisleri water and was only earning Rs.4,000/- per month. It was further stated that opposite party was earning Rs.20,000/- from tuition and was also having income from a shop named as Kanha Garments. The court below after considering the application and the reply filed by the parties came to the conclusion that opposite party is entitled to Rs.6000/- as interim maintenance from the appellant. Further, while coming to the said conclusion, the court below considered the tax returns submitted by the opposite party in respect of the firm of the appellant, which was in the name of Agarwal Cold Drinks, for which the appellant in the months of June, September and December had submitted quarterly tax return and had paid tax to the tune of Rs.20,958.52 for the month of June, Rs.10,000/- for the month of September and Rs.33,178.5 for the month of December. On the basis of the return so submitted the court below arrived at the finding that the appellant was earning about Rs.15,000/- per month.
We have heard counsel for the appellant and perused the material on record. It is not in dispute that the appellant is running a firm in the name of Agarwal Cold Drinks for which quarterly tax return had been filed by the opposite party, which has not been denied by the appellant.
Considering the facts, that opposite party has no independent source of income as only averment has been made in the reply of the appellant, but no document has been filed to substantiate the same, while the opposite party had filed the tax returns for the sales which establishes the fact that the appellant has sufficient
income.
In view of the above, we find that there is no illegality in the order dated 8.4.2019, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Fourth Fast Trick Court, Additional Family Court, Bulandshahr.
The appeal fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 9.5.2019 AKJ
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the interim maintenance order under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is legally sustainable.
Whether the lower court erred in estimating income based on tax returns filed for the firm.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Nitish Agrawal
Pragya Agrawal
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
