Single-judge appeal against Family Court's dismissal of wife's maintenance application under Section 24 HMA. Bench upheld award of Rs.75,000/month despite husband's higher income and foreign residence, rejecting claim of procedural impropriety.
Application dismissed; Family Court order awarding interim maintenance to respondent 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.
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 1st March, 2024.
ABHISHEK GARG ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Shikha Kaushik, Advocate. Versus
AVNI JAIN ..... Respondent Through: Nemo.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 13013/2024
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 71/2024 & CM APPL. 13011-12/2024
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:DINESH KUMAR Signing Date :05. 03.2024 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 71/2024 16:27:12
Page 1 of 3
livelihood with effect from 11.07.2018 till final disposal of the divorce petition.
4.1 To be noted, the appellant/husband has instituted a petition for divorce under Section 13 (1)(ia) of the HMA.
5.1 It is, therefore, Ms. Kaushik’s submission that this appeal has been filed to preserve the appellant’s/husband’s right to prosecute the revision action.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH KUMAR Signing Date :05. 03.2024 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 71/2024 16:27:12
Page 2 of 3
appellant/husband may incur in Singapore, even then, the maintenance awarded to the respondent/wife at the rate of Rs.75,000/- per month does not seem to be unreasonable. Furthermore, the learned Additional Principal Judge has also indicated in paragraph 7 of the impugned order that the amount paid to the respondent/wife in any other proceedings shall stand adjusted against the maintenance ordered by him via the impugned order.
RAJIV SHAKDHER (JUDGE)
AMIT BANSAL (JUDGE)
MARCH 1, 2024/A
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH KUMAR Signing Date :05. 03.2024 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 71/2024 16:27:12
Page 3 of 3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Family Court's award of interim maintenance to the wife is unreasonable given the husband's income and expenses.
Whether the appeal against the dismissal of the wife's maintenance application warrants interference.
Whether the maintenance order must be altered pending a revision application filed by the husband against a CrPC maintenance order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Abhishek Garg
Avni Jain
Rajiv Shakdher
Amit Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
An appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act 1984 against a decree or order of a Family Court.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
