The High Court dismissed an appeal against an interim maintenance order. The order affirmed the principal judge's award of Rs. 10,000/- maintenance but directed the trial court to dispose of the main suit within six months.
The appeal against the maintenance order was dismissed; the trial court is directed to decide the main suit within six months.
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. - 4
Case :- FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 359 of 2019
Appellant :- Rajesh Chaudhary Respondent :- Neha Chaudhary Counsel for Appellant :- J.B. Singh,Awadhesh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Following order was passed by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court in this case on 17.12.2019 :
"List this matter on 02.01.2020 on which date appellant shall remain present in person before this Court and shall also file certified copy of the list of documents filed before Court below."
In compliance of the order dated 17.12.2019, the appellant has appeared before us in person and filed an affidavit stating therein that the applicant could not obtain certified copies of the list of documents filed by him before Principal Judge, Family Court, G.B. Nagar as the evidences filed by him before Principal Judge, Family Court, G.B. Nagar comprised of photostat copies of the documents. The copy of the application filed by him before Principal Judge, Family Court, G. B. Nagar for issuing certified copies of the documents filed by him in support of his case before Principal Judge, Family Court, G.B. Nagar has been brought on record as Annexure-S.A. 1 to the supplementary affidavit.
The explanation furnished by the appellant for his failure to comply with the order of this Court dated 17.12.2019 appears to be satisfactory. We now proceed to examine the matter on merits.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
This appeal is directed against the order dated 4.5.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court. G. B. Nagar in Original Suit No. 24 of 2017 (Rajesh Chaudhary Vs. Smt. Neha Chaudhary) by which the application 4 (ga) moved by the appellant before him under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been allowed in part and the appellant has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month as interim maintenance, Rs. 20,000/- towards expenses of proceedings and Rs. 500/towards conveyance charges to the respondent-wife.
We have perused the impugned order and the other material brought on record. We do not find that the impugned order suffers from any illegality or legal infirmity requiring any interference by this Court. The Principal Judge, Family Court, G. B. Nagar after taking note of the fact that the appellant-husband was employed as a Teacher in Amity International School and was drawing a salary of Rs. 50,000/- per month, rightly awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as interim maintenance to the respondentwife. The amount awarded as maintenance is neither on the higher side nor can be said to have been arbitrarily assessed.
For the aforesaid reasons, we refuse to interfere with the impugned order. However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct Principal Judge, Family Court. G. B. Nagar to make every possible endeavour to decide Original Suit No. 24 of 2017 (Rajesh Chaudhary Vs. Smt. Neha Chaudhary) as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of certified copy of this order before him.
Subject to the aforesaid directions, this appeal stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 2.1.2020
SA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to interfere with the interim maintenance and expenses awarded under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Whether to direct the trial court to decide the pending suit expeditiously.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajesh Chaudhary
Neha Chaudhary
Bala Krishna Narayana
Shamim Ahmed
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
