This court dismissed a filing against an interim maintenance order of Rs.2,500 per month awarded to the petitioner-wife. The court held the order was not perversely low and the main application must be decided below within a year.
Revision petition disposed of; main application remanded for disposal within one year; stay petition disposed of.
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.
[2024:RJ-JD:15508]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 59/2024
Yashoda Rankawat W/o Varun Swami, Aged About 26 Years, D/o Late Purushottam Chand Rankawat, Caste Swami, R/o Opposite Trauma Centre, Panchayat Samiti, Road, Ratangarh, District Churu (Raj)
----Petitioner
Versus
Varun Swami S/o Shri Tejprakash, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Ward No. 43, Gujro Ki Dhani, Ratangarh, District Churu (Raj)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kunal Bishnoi For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
08/04/2024
Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-wife against the order dated 09.05.2023 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Ratangarh, District Churu, in Case No.72/2021 whereby the learned Judge has ordered a meager amount of Rs.2,500/- per month to the petitioner as interim maintenance alongwith Rs.500/- per hearing. The petitioner has prayed for appropriate enhancement.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned court below has awarded an inadequate amount of maintenance in favour of the petitioner without considering the fact that the respondent-husband is a Government employee and earning Rs.70,000/- per month. Furthermore, the petitioner is unemployed. In these circumstances, the interim maintenance of
[2024:RJ-JD:15508]
[CRLR-59/2024]
(2 of 2)
Rs.2,500/- per month alongwith Rs.500/- per hearing, awarded by the court below in favour of petitioner is required to be enhanced by this Court.
I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order passed by the court below as also the material available on record.
The impugned order passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Ratangarh, District Churu is an interim order. The final order on the application is yet to be passed by the court below. The learned court below after taking into consideration all the material available before it, has rightly awarded interim maintenance of Rs.2,500/- per month in favour of the petitioner alongwith Rs.500/- per hearing. The order impugned does not suffer from any illegality and perversity, hence, no interference is called for from this Court.
The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. The court below is directed to decide the main application after taking into consideration all the documents and material aspect of the matter as well as statements so recorded before it, within a period of one year from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Stay petition is also disposed of.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
10-Ishan/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an interim maintenance order of Rs.2,500 per month passes the test of perversity requiring interference in revision.
Yashoda Rankawat
Varun Swami
Manoj Kumar Garg
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
