Allowed

Lakhan Lal v. Rekha Rani

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2019FAPL/790/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant challenged an order awarding him interim maintenance liability under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The court found the awarded amount reasonable given the cost of living and refused to interfere, directing the lower court to expedite the main proceeding.

What did the court decide?

Interference with the maintenance order refused; lower court directed to decide the main case within six months.

Lakhan Lal Vs Rekha Rani — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 790 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Lakhan Lal Respondent :- Rekha Rani Counsel for Appellant :- Jadu Nandan Yadav,Agnivesh

¶4

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶6

This appeal is directed against the order dated 30.08.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur in Civil Misc. Case No. 04/74/2019, (Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. Lakhan Lal) by which the application 4 क moved by the defendant/respondent u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been allowed in part and the appellant is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month as interim maintenance, Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation expenses and Rs. 500/- per day towards conveyance charges.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that since the appellant is earning a sum of Rs. 4,500/- per month only and both the children of the appellant and defendant/respondent are residing with him, the amount of interim maintenance awarded, considering the monthly income of the appellant, is on the higher side and hence, the impugned order is liable to be modified to the extent it directs the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the defendant/respondent. Moreover, the defendant/respondent had left her matrimonial home at her own sweet will and on that account also, she is not entitled to any interim maintenance.

¶8

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned order as well as other material brought on record, we find that a very meagre amount of Rs. 3,000/- has been awarded as maintenance. Considering the high cost of living, a person requires atleast Rs. 100/- per day to meet his daily expenses. Hence, we do not find that the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur committed any error or illegality in awarding interim maintenance to the defendant/respondent at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month. We, therefore, refuse to interfere with the impugned order.

¶9

However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur to make every possible endeavour to decide the Civil Misc. Case No. 04/74/2019, (Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. Lakhan Lal), as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of certified copy of this order before him.

¶10

Subject to aforesaid observations, this appeal is disposed of finally.

¶11

Order Date :- 26.11.2019 KS

Lakhan Lal v. Rekha Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhan Lal v. Rekha Rani

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

Sarabjeet Singh Gandhi Vs Punit Kaur

Shagun Bansal Vs Roopali Gupta

Vijay Singh Vs Radha Devi and Another

Rohit Kumar Vs Smt. Kavita

The District Inspector of Schools Allahabad and Others Vs Narendra Kumar Singh and Another

Santoshi Vs Krishna Kumar