Dismissed

Rahul Soni v. Smt Sunita Soni and Anr.

Rajasthan HC24 Apr 2017CRLR/431/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging interim maintenance granted to the petitioner's wife and daughter. The Court held that poverty of the husband is not a defense against the wife's right to maintenance and found the lower appellate court correctly justified the quantum.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition challenging the interim maintenance orders dated 4th November, 2016 and 10th February, 2017 is dismissed.

Rahul Soni Vs Smt Sunita Soni and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT

¶2

JAIPUR.

¶3

¶4

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 431 / 2017.

¶5

Rahul Soni son of Late Shri Radhey Shyam Soni, Caste – Soni,

¶6

R/o Sant Sahib Colony, Blad Road, Nearby Annapurna Colony, Beawar, District Ajmer.

¶7

----Petitioner
Versus

¶8

Smt. Sunita Soni W/o Rahul Soni, D/o Radhey Shyam Soni, Caste Soni, R/o Nearby Beauty Studio Nahar Mohalla, Patti Katla, Ajmer, Police Thana - Sadar Kotwali, Ajmer.

¶9

State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶10

----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Tomar.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishiraj Singh, PP.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MAHESHWARI

Order

24/04/2017

BY THE COURT :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/husband.

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[CRLR-431/2017]

¶18

Husband/petitioner has preferred this Criminal Revision Petition challenging the order dated 4^th November, 2016 passed by learned trial Court whereby, interim maintenance allowance @ Rs. 2,000/- per month for the wife and Rs. 2,000/- per month for her daughter was granted under Section 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Husband/petitioner has also challenged the order dated 10^th February, 2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases), Ajmer whereby, the criminal appeal preferred by the husband against the said order dated 4^th November, 2016 was rejected and the criminal appeal preferred by wife Smt. Sunita Soni was partially allowed giving effect to the order dated 4^th November, 2016 from the date of filing of the application preferred by her under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

¶19

Learned counsel for the husband/petitioner has stated that the wife/respondent is having her own sources of income whereas the husband/petitioner is working as a labourer on one Goldsmith shop. He is not having sufficient income to provide the monetary relief granted in favour of the wife/respondent and his daughter.

¶20

On perusal of the orders impugned dated 4^th November, 2016 and 10^th February, 2017, it reveals that the learned lower

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

[CRLR-431/2017]

¶23

Appellate Court has discussed in detail the objections raised by the husband/petitioner and has inferred that poverty of the husband/petitioner cannot be ground for defence against the right of the wife for interim maintenance allowance. The quantum of income has been under dispute before the learned lower Appellate Court on the basis of the affidavit and counter-affidavit sworn-in by both the sides but looking to the day-to-day needs in these days, the Court below has inferred that the sum of Rs. 2,000/- per month as awarded by the learned trial Court is proper and justified in which, no interference is required to be made.

¶24

I do not feel that there is any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned Court below while upholding the quantum of interim maintenance as determined by the learned trial Court. In the facts and circumstances discussed in the order impugned dated 10^th February, 2017, this criminal revision petition

¶25

does not deserve admission and the same is dismissed accordingly.

¶26

(DEEPAK MAHESHWARI), J.

¶27

/Mohan/42

Rahul Soni v. Smt Sunita Soni and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Soni v. Smt Sunita Soni and Anr.

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

Pushpendra Jain and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Amin and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Ramdhan and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Mukendra @ Binny Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Durgesh Meena Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.