Vikrant Sharma vs Smt. Gunjan Sharma on 12 February, 2018

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
FA-819-2017
(VIKRANT SHARMA Vs SMT. GUNJAN SHARMA)

Jabalpur, Dated : 12-02-2018
Shri Pal Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Brijesh Rajak, learned counsel for the respondent.

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 11th
September 2017 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur in

sh
Civil Suit No. 1032-A of 2016 on an application filed under Section
24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

e
ad
By the aforesaid order, the trial court ordered that the
appellant shall pay an amount of Rs.7500/- and expenses to attend
Pr
the court to the respondent. The court mentioned the fact that the
a
appellant has been working as Probationary Officer in Allahadbad
hy

Bank. He is getting monthly salary of Rs.45,000/- per month.

ad

Learned learned counsel for the appellant admitted the fact
that the appellant has been working as Probationary Officer in
M

Allahabad Bank. However, learned counsel for the appellant has
of

submitted that there is no provision to grant legal expenses under
Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

rt

We are not in agreement with the argument advanced by
ou

learned counsel for the appellant. Section 24 of The Hindu
C

Marriage Act, 1955 reads as under:-
h
ig

“24 Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of
proceedings – —Where in any proceeding under this
H

Act it appears to the court that either the wife or the
husband, as the case may be, has no independent
income sufficient for her or his support and the
necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the
application of the wife or the husband, order the
respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the
proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such
sum as, having regard to the petitioner’s own income
and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the
court to be reasonable.

[Provided that the application for the payment of
the expenses of the proceeding and such monthly sum
during the proceeding, shall, as far as possible, be
disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of
notice on the wife or the husband, as the case may be.]”

From bare reading of aforesaid Section, it is clear that the
court can award expenses of proceedings, in case the appellant
has been working as Probationary Officer in Allahabad Bank. The

sh
respondent present in the court has stated that she is not working
anywhere. The trial court has only awarded Rs.7500/- as legal

e
ad
expenses. In our opinion, the expenses awarded by the trial court is
on lower side. However, there is no cross appeal, it would not
Pr
proper to enhance the expenses. The appellant has filed this
a
appeal unnecessarily. This is vexatious litigation, hence, the appeal is
hy

dismissed with imposition of cost of Rs.10,000/-. The appellant shall
ad

pay cost of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent within a period of one
month. If the cost is not paid. The order dated 11th September
M

2017 and this order be submitted to the Office of the Bank where
of

the appellant is posted and an amount of Rs.10,000/- be paid to the
respondent after deducting it from the salary of the appellant by
rt

the responsible officer of the Allahabad Bank.

ou

Record of the trial court be sent back.

C
h
ig

(S.K. GANGELE) (SMT. ANJULI PALO)
JUDGE JUDGE
H

bks

Digitally signed by BASANT
KUMAR SHRIVAS
Date: 2018.02.12 12:58:54
+05’30’

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *