Civil Revision Petition challenging the trial Court's interim maintenance order. The High Court found no infirmity and dismissed the revision.
CRP dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending in the writ stand closed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2483 of 2014
ORDER:
This CRP is filed against the order dated 24.06.2014 passed in I.A.No.44 of 2014 in F.O.P.No.05 of 2014 wherein the trial Court has granted maintenance @ of Rs.10,000/- per month and Rs.20,000/towards legal expenses to the petitioner and her daughter.
The case of the petitioner is that he filed O.P.No.5 of 2014 on the file of the Judge, Family Court-cum-VIII Additional District Court at Mahboobnagar seeking divorce from the respondent. The respondent therein filed I.A.No.44 of 2014 in O.P.No.05 of 2014 for grant of maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month and Rs.50,000/towards legal expenses. The trial Court after considering the case passed the impugned order granting Rs.10, 000/-per month towards maintenance to respondent and her daughter and Rs.20,000/- towards legal expenses. Aggrieved by the same, the present CRP is filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-respondent vehemently contended that the respondent herself has deserted the petitioner and petitioner tried his best to bring back the respondent. But the respondent is not willing to lead marital life with the petitioner. As such, petitioner has filed divorce petition in O.P.No.5 of 2014. She also contended that the respondent is educated and used to work as private teacher before filing the O.P. She also contends that petitioner is a only a contract employee and he is not drawing the amount as alleged by the respondent and he has responsibility of looking after his parents.
The trial Court after considering the case of both sides, granted Rs.10,000/-per month towards maintenance and Rs.20,000/towards legal expenses to the respondent and her daughter though
she has claimed Rs.25,000/- per month towards maintenance and Rs.50,000/- towards legal expenses.
The fact that the petitioner is a Software Engineer is not denied and in the Court below petitioner simply denied the averments that he is not earning Rs.1 lakh per month and further he has not filed any documents showing particulars of salary. Since the trial Court has granted Rs.10,000/- per month towards maintenance and Rs.20,000/- per month towards legal expenses to the respondent as well as his daughter and since it is stated that petitioner is Software Engineer earning Rs.1 lakh per month, petitioner should have filed salary certificate showing that he is not earning the said amount. Petitioner has not even stated in the counter affidavit in the court below what are the other responsibilities he is having.
The trial Court befitting the status of the petitioner granted maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent and her daughter which is not exorbitant. I do not see any infirmity in the order passed by the Court below warranting interference under Article 227 of Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the CRP is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.
_____________________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
Date: 07-10-2014 dv
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the learned trial Court committed any infirmity while granting maintenance and legal expenses to the wife in a divorce proceeding warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution.
PETITIONER (RESPONDENT IN CIVIL SUIT)
RESPONDENT (PETITIONER IN CIVIL SUIT / HUSBAND)
A. RAJASHEKER REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
