Dismissed

Jnanesh Singh v. Shweta Singh

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2019FAPL/706/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal against an order awarding interim maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- per month was dismissed. The court ruled that the amount was not excessive considering the appellant's admitted income of Rs. 1,00,000/- per month and the constitutional duty to maintain the wife and children.

What did the court decide?

Interim maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- per month awarded by the lower court affirmed.

Jnanesh Singh Vs Shweta Singh — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 706 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Jnanesh Singh Respondent :- Shweta Singh Counsel for Appellant :- Anurag Pathak

¶4

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anurag Pathak, learned counsel for appellant and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This appeal under Section 19 of Family Court Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1984") has arisen from judgment dated 12.09.2019 passed by Sri Ashok Kumar SinghV, Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Budh Nagar in Case No. 58 of 2018 (Smt. Shweta Singh Vs. Jnanesh Singh) under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ( hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1955" ) awarding interim maintenance to respondentwife and minor children to the extent of Rs. 25,000/- per month.

¶7

Counsel for appellant contended that aforesaid amount is excessive, inasmuch as, appellant is already incurring some of the expenses of respondent-wife and children as he is paying house rent and also school fee, therefore, amount awarded by Court below to respondent-wife is excessive.

¶8

We find that evidence placed before Court below shows that income of appellant is more than Rs. 18 lac per annum in the financial year 2017-18. Court below has also referred to the admission of appellant that he has salary income of Rs. 1,00,000/- per month. Besides, there is some business also from which income has not taken into consideration by Court below.

¶9

Be that as it may, income of appellant admittedly is Rs.

¶10

1,00,000/- per month and considering the same, amount of Rs.

¶11

25,000/- awarded by Court below towards interim maintenance to respondent-wife and minor children who admittedly residing with her, cannot be said to be excessive or unjust or unreasonable so as to justify interference by this Court. Admittedly, respondent-wife is a legally wedded wife of appellant and it is the responsibility of appellant to maintain his wife and children as par with appellant himself and, therefore also aforesaid amount is not excessive or unjust.

¶12

In view thereof, appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed at the stage of hearing under Order 41 Rule 11 CPC.

¶13

Order Date :- 22.10.2019 Siddhant Sahu

Jnanesh Singh v. Shweta Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jnanesh Singh v. Shweta Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mithai Lal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Dinesh Kumar Shukla and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S Rishu Medical Medical Store Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dinesh Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Harendra Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Swami Shri Satyendra(Satya Sahib Ji) Vs State of U.P. and Anohter