Allowed

Mandala Srinivasa Reddy v. Mandala Rama Devi

Telangana HC20 Nov 2015CRP/4766/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the civil revision petition challenging the Family Court's mandatory order of Rs. 15,000 monthly maintenance. The Court allowed six weeks for arrears payments and directed the lower court to conclude the divorce proceedings within four months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to pay arrears within six weeks; lower court directed to conclude divorce petition within four months.

Mandala Srinivasa Reddy Vs Mandala Rama Devi — Maintenance and Alimony | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY

¶2

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4766 of 2015

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed against the order dated 16.09.2015 in I.A.No.539 of 2015 in FCOP.No.93 of 2014 passed by the Judge, Family Court at Secunderabad.

¶5

The petitioner-husband filed the aforesaid FCOP for grant of divorce. In the said OP, the respondent-wife has filed the present I.A under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for grant of maintenance at Rs.30,000/- per month pending disposal of the FCOP. It is the case of the respondent-wife that the petitioner, without valid reason, refused to maintain her and, by making false allegations against her, filed the FCOP for grant of divorce. Pleading that she has no means of maintenance, the present IA is filed by the respondent-wife claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per month. By impugned order, the Court below, having regard to the fact that the petitioner is working as Deputy Executive Engineer in Roads & Buildings Department and was drawing gross salary of Rs.77,314/per month by July, 2015 and net salary of Rs.56,694/- per month, has ordered the petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.15,000/per month from the date of filing of the petition.

¶6

H e a rd S r i B.Sarvotham Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶7

and Sri Baddam Narasimha Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶8

Though it is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that

¶9

the respondent is having her own income and, in spite of the same and without disclosing the same, the present I.A is filed for grant of maintenance, no material is placed before the Court with regard to income of the respondent. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is working as Deputy Executive Engineer in Roads & Buildings Department. In that view of the matter, we do not find any merit in this petition to interfere with the impugned order granting maintenance at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month to the respondent, who is the wife of the petitioner. However, as the petitioner has pleaded that due to financial stringency, he could not pay maintenance and requested to grant some reasonable time to pay arrears, he is permitted to pay arrears of maintenance within a period of six weeks from today. Further, the learned Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad, is directed to dispose of FCOP.No.93 of 2014 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from today.

¶10

Subject to above, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶11

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶12

_____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J

¶13

20.11.2015

¶14

v v

Mandala Srinivasa Reddy v. Mandala Rama Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mandala Srinivasa Reddy v. Mandala Rama Devi

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

Nagesh Patalay, Vs R.B. Jinender Raj

A.Raghu Vs The Osmangunj Extension Cooperative Housing Society Ltd.

A Ashok Vs Osmangunj Extension Cooperative Housing Society Ltd.

Jamia Nizamia, Vs Dairatul Maarifil Osmania

Smt. C. Rajyalaxmi, Vs M/s. Marvin Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Hassan Bin Salam Vs Smt. B. Vijayalaxmi