Dismissed

Surendra Gupta v. Smt. Anita Gupta

Allahabad HC14 May 2019FAPL/409/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act assailed an order granting interim maintenance and litigation expenses to the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The husband argued the wife received maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The court held Section 125 maintenance is not a bar under Section 24 and found the awarded amount reasonable. Appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; order dated 5.4.2019 upholding maintenance awarded by Additional Family Judge, Varanasi, remains intact.

Surendra Gupta Vs Smt. Anita Gupta — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 409 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Surendra Gupta Respondent :- Smt. Anita Gupta Counsel for Appellant :- Tarun Varma

¶4

Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

Present appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been filed assailing the order dated 5.4.2019 passed by Additional Family Judge/Fast Track Court, Varanasi in proceeding under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Appellant before this Court is the husband, who was married to respondent on 25.2.2007 according to Hindu rites and custom.

¶6

According to appellant, respondent after returning to her parental house refused to return back, as such he had filed a Habeas Corpus Petition No.44517 of 2010 before this Court. Thereafter, he has also filed a Matrimonial Petition No.1013 of 2010 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for the restitution of conjugal rights.

¶7

In the aforesaid proceedings, respondent/wife on 3.10.2018 filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act ( for short 'Act') claiming Rs.10,000/as interim maintenance and Rs.5000/- for her child and further lumpsum litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. This application was contested by appellant, who filed his reply and stated that respondent was already receiving Rs.1500/per month from 22.3.2011 in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. He further stated that he was a labour. Further, he had stated that respondent was earning Rs.10,000/- per

¶8

month from tuition and coaching and she could maintain herself. The Court below had granted Rs.2000/- lumpsum amount and further granted Rs.1000/- per month as litigation expenses.

¶9

We have heard Sri Tarun Verma, learned Counsel for appellant and perused the material on record, Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for interim maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings, in case, either the wife of the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceedings, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner's own income and the income of the respondent.

¶10

In the present case, respondent having no means to maintain herself and her child, had moved an application under Section 24 for the payment of maintenance pendente lite.

¶11

Learned Counsel for appellant has submitted that respondent was already getting Rs.15,00/- per month in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C., as such, she was not entitled any maintenance under Section 24 of the Act. In Neelam Kalia Vs. Rajesh Kalia, AIR 2013 HP 76 , the court held that maintenance being paid under Section 125 Cr.P.C. cannot be sole ground for declining maintenance under Section 24.

¶12

As the Court below had awarded lumpsum amount of Rs.

¶13

2000/- only and further Rs.1000/- per month as expenses, we find that the amount granted by the Court below is not on the higher side, and, as such the order dated 5.4.2019 does not suffer from any illegality.

¶14

Accordingly, present appeal is dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 14.5.2019 S. Singh

Surendra Gupta v. Smt. Anita Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Gupta v. Smt. Anita Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Asha Ram Contractors Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Karamveer Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Farooq Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharamvir Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sameer Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deependra Singh Chauhan @ Deepu Chauhan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others