The High Court dismissed an appeal against a family court order awarding interim maintenance, child school fees, and court attendance expenses to the respondent-wife. The court held the awards were not excessive despite the appellant's unemployment claims.
Appeal dismissed; orders of the Court below upheld.
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. - 34
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 516 of 2019
Appellant :- Manish Kumar Sharma Respondent :- Smt. Mamta Sharma Counsel for Appellant :- Ravish Kumar Singh,Mithilesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Nipun Singh
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J .
4.Defendant-Appellant claims that he is unemployed and therefore, he is incapable of making the aforesaid payment of school fees. However,
Defendant-Appellant could not disclose as to what is his source of income and how does he meet his every day expenses. It is not disputed that the Plaintiff-Respondent is the legally wedded wife of the DefendantAppellant. As such, it is statutory and moral duty of the DefendantAppellant to maintain his wife and look after his minor son as well.
Order Date :- 15.7.2019
YK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the interim maintenance and school fees awarded by the family court below were excessive given the appellant's claim of unemployment.
Whether the defendant-appellant's failure to disclose his source of income affects the conclusion that the awarded amount is unjust.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Manish Kumar Sharma
Smt. Mamta Sharma
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
