Partly allowed

Varanasi Tulasi Ram v. [email protected]

Orissa HC4 Dec 2019WP(C)/2640/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, via writ petition, set aside the Family Court's interim maintenance award under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Due to lack of proof regarding the husband's claimed income, the Court reduced the wife's maintenance and the child's maintenance to specific lower amounts while maintaining the litigation expenses order.

What did the court decide?

Interim maintenance reduced to Rs. 6,000/month for wife and Rs. 3,500/month for son; litigation expenses at Rs. 5,000 maintained; arrears to be paid in two instalments within two months.

Varanasi Tulasi Ram Vs P.Padmini@v.Padmini — Maintenance and Alimony | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

W.P.(C). No.2640 of 2018

¶2

6 04.12.2019 Heard the submissions of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

¶3

In C.P.No.57 of 2015, wife as petitioner filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act claiming therein for grant of Rs.50,000/- as interim maintenance to the petitioner and further sum of Rs.25,000/as maintenance for the son of the petitioner per month and with further sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards litigation expenses. In paragraph-10 the petitioner disclosed that the opposite party-husband therein being a M.Tech. Civil Engineer and working as Senior Engineer at “JACOBS” Engineering Group, Mumbai was getting handsome salary of Rs.2,00,000/- per month. Besides that the wife has also contended that the husband has a vast family properties thereby also earning a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- per annum. Besides, the husband also claimed to have been got Rs.20,000/- per month from house rent. Opposing he submission of the petitioner, the opposite party-husband herein in paragraph-17 of his objection while flatly denying to have been working any further but, however, did not earning from household properties and also towards house rent.

¶4

Be that as it may, the Family Court discussing this aspect in paragraph-5 of the impugned order has come to observe that the minimum income of the husband cannot be less than Rs.60,000/- per month and it is in the process directed for payment of pendent lite interim maintenance of Rs.7,500/- per month to the petitioner and Rs.5,400/- per month for the male baby from the date of filing of the application. This apart, the Family Court also granted a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses to be paid by the husband to the wife.

¶5

¶6

Challenging the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner-husband taking to the plea taken in the objection and the discussions by the Family Court contended that there is no foundation with regard to such grant of interim maintenance in favour of the wife as well as the son. He thus, prayed this Court for interfering in the said order and reducing the interim maintenance appropriately.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party-wife however taking this Court to the discussions in the impugned order submitted that there is just consideration of the aspect of interim maintenance requiring no interference in the same.

¶8

Considering the submissions of learned counsel appearing for the parties and looking to the foundation based on paragraph-10 of the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and to the denial of the husband in paragraph-17 in the objection before the Family Court, this Court finds though the wife claimed that the petitioner is earning Rs.2,00,000/- per month as salary besides Rs.2,00,000/- towards household property and Rs.20,000/towards house rent, the husband while objecting the claim made in paragraph-10 of the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act but, however, though denied to have been unemployed any further and getting salary to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- per month. From the entire reading by this Court, this Court also finds nowhere that there is objection by the husband to the claim of the wife of his receiving Rs.2,00,000/- from household property per annum and Rs.20,000/- towards house rent.

¶9

Though there is no material to establish the income of the husband however, taking into account the submission made in this Court that the wife and the boy child both are residing with her father at Bhubaneswar, further taking into account

¶10

¶11

the bare minimum necessity on the maintenance of a lady along with small child, the wife should be entitled to bare minimum Rs.200/- per day for herself. As a consequence, this Court interfering in the interim maintenance directed by the Family Court at Rs.7,500/-, reduces the same to Rs.6,000/- (Rupees six thousand) per month. So far the small child is concerned, the monthly maintenance is also reduced to Rs.3,500/- (Rupees three thousand five hundred) from Rs.5,400/-.

¶12

The interim maintenance shall be paid to the wife as well as to the small baby from the date of filing of application i.e. 4.10.2016. Running interim maintenance shall be paid by 12^th of every succeeding month. This Court also maintains the direction of the Family Court so far litigation expenses Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) as it is. Arrear, if any, shall also be paid to the wife by the husband within a period of two months but in two equal instalments.

¶13

The writ petition stands disposed of with the interference in the impugned order indicated hereinabove.

¶14

……………………… Biswanath Rath,J.

¶15

sks

Varanasi Tulasi Ram v. [email protected]

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varanasi Tulasi Ram v. [email protected]

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

Prasanta Kumer Vs Cmn.,Rushikulya G.B.

Dr.Prasanta Ku.Moharana Vs Susama Maharana @ Ojha

Birosh Tamang Vs Director General of Police (S.a.P)

Narendra Ch.Behera Vs O.F.D.C.Ltd.

Pundarika Badajena Vs Nabakishore Jena

Sangeet Dutta Vs a.O.,D.G.M.Electrica