Allowed

Kawaljeet Kaur Milkha Bedi v. Milkha Singh Bedi

Bombay HC1 Oct 2007CAM/206/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil application for enhancement of maintenance, the High Court found the interim sum of Rs. 1500/month inadequate. Considering the husband's salary, the Court modified the order to direct payment of Rs. 3000/month to meet the wife's basic necessities.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order directing monthly maintenance of Rs. 1500/- was modified to direct payment of Rs. 3000/- per month payable on or before the 10th of each month.

Kawaljeet Kaur Milkha Bedi Vs Milkha Singh Bedi — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 206 OF 2007

¶5

 WITH

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 243 OF 2007

¶7

IN

¶8

 FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 166 OF 2007

¶9

 Kawaljeet Kaur M. Bedi. .. Appellant.

¶10

vs.

¶11

 Milkha Singh Bedi. .. Respondent.

¶12

 Mrs. Kawaljeet Kaur M. Bedi in person.

¶13

 Mr. S.H. Bhosale for respondent.

¶14

CORAM: J.N. PATEL &

¶15

 A.A. SAYED, JJ.

¶16

 DATE: 1ST OCTOBER, 2007.

¶17

 P.C.

¶18

 . The applicant-wife moved an application for
 enhancement of maintenance which has been granted by
 the Family Court under the impugned judgment and
 decree. This Court in the Family Court Appeal
 preferred by the husband has passed interim order on
 3.7.2006 directing the appellant to pay monthly

¶19

¶20

 maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1500/- per month with
 certain directions incorporating the consequences which
 will follow in case of failure on the part of the
 appellant to pay the money.

¶21

 2. We find that a sum of Rs. 1500/- is on a lower
 side as it will hardly meet the bare necessities of
 life like food, shelter, clothing, medical expenses and
 minimum allowance for recreation to which a human being
 is entitled. The respondent-husband has produced his
 salary certificate for the month of July, 2007. The
 same is taken on record and marked "X" for
 identification purposes. The respondent gets salary of
 Rs. 20,003.24 paise as Office Assistant in the Medical
 Department of BEST whereas his take-home salary as
 shown is a meagre amount of Rs. 4,890/-

¶22

 3. The learned counsel appearing for the husband
 on taking instructions submits that the loan in the sum
 of Rs. 9900/- which is being deducted from the salary
 has been taken for repair of house and that the husband
 has to maintain his 80 years old mother. We find that
 in the city of Mumbai to meet the bare necessities of
 life an individual is required to pay at least a sum of
 Rs. 3000/- and, therefore, we modify our order and
 direct the respondent-husband to pay a sum of Rs.
 3000/- per month from the month of October, 2007. The
 maintenance is to be paid on or before 10th of each
 month which means that the amount should be credited in

¶23

¶24

 the accounts of the appellant-wife on or before 10th of
 each month. We make it clear that in case of any one
 default this court will dismiss the appeal preferred by
 the appellant-husband i.e. Family Court Appeal No. 52
 of 2007 and may strike off the defence in the appeal
 preferred by the wife i.e. Family Court Appeal No.
 166 of 2007 besides taking action for non-compliance of

¶25

 our orders.

¶26

 4. The Civil Application stands disposed of

¶27

 accordingly. No order as to costs.

¶28

 (J.N. Patel, J. )

¶29

 (A.A. Sayed, J. )

Kawaljeet Kaur Milkha Bedi v. Milkha Singh Bedi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kawaljeet Kaur Milkha Bedi v. Milkha Singh Bedi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivaji Narhari Kawade Vs Ramchandra Narhari Kawade and Ors.

Kolhapur Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs Suresh Bajarang Powar and Ors.

Kolhapur Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs Vidya Nandkumar Kadam and Ors.

Shri Naresh Gangaram Chinchane Vs Bank Karmachari Sangh and Another

Gautam Pandurang Nage Vs Lata Gautam Nage

Anusuya Harishchandra Mhatre and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra