SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Diksha Kapur vs Varun Jagotta on 8 May, 2019

CR No.1169 of 2019 1

261
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Revision No.1169 of 2019
Date of Decision: 08.05.2019

Diksha Kapur ……Petitioner

Vs

Varun Jagotta ….Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

Present:Mr. Jaswinder Singh Randhawa, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Paras Chugh, Advocate
for the respondent.

****

RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.

[1]. Petitioner has preferred this revision petition for the

modification of order dated 17.01.2019 passed by the Principal

Judge, Family Court, Panchkula granting maintenance

pendente lite of Rs.10,000/- per month and litigation expenses

to the tune of Rs.40,000/- under Section 24 of the Hindu

Marriage Act.

[2]. Marriage between the parties was solemnized on

06.12.2014 according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies. No

child has taken birth from this wedlock. Due to matrimonial

discord, the parties are living separately for some time.

1 of 5
12-05-2019 06:49:48 :::
CR No.1169 of 2019 2

Respondent has filed petition under Section 13 of the Hindu

Marriage Act for a decree of divorce in the competent Court at

Panchkula. Petitioner sought maintenance pendente lite and

litigation expenses during pendency of the aforesaid petition.

[3]. The trial Court has granted an amount of Rs.10,000/-

as maintenance pendente lite and Rs.40,000/- as litigation

expenses vide the impugned order.

[4]. Respondent is qualified person and is a motion graphic

designer in Intelligia Technologies Pvt. Ltd. in Panchkula. As per

salary slip, the gross income of the respondent is pleaded to be

Rs.85,000/- per month. Petitioner also alleged that the

respondent is earning handsome amount from the aforesaid

business. As per profile, respondent is a lead motion designer

having recommendations from his customers for whom he had

done work to their satisfaction. Some of the recommendations

are also part of profile which reads as under:-

“Ray McHale: We needed a professional explainer video
for our new site so we turned to Varun to
deliver. He worked closely with us from the
outset to clearly understand the brief and
developed a highly professional video. I
would highly recommend Varun to anyone
looking for similar services.

Veekunth Arora: Well the most simple words to find in
dictionary for Varun would be Animation
Prodigy. He handles the client with precision
of client’s needs. I was well satisfied with his

2 of 5
::: Downloaded on – 12-05-2019 06:49:48 :::
CR No.1169 of 2019 3
punctuality. Anyone looking for a maestro in
explainer videos should not hesitate to give
him work.

Karolis Duoba: Varun is truly talented and creative digital
artist. We enjoyed working with him and
every project done by Varun is overreaching
our expectation. He will always surprise you
with outstanding and creative work. We
were thrilled when our expectations in terms
of cost savings and the speed with which we
accomplished our goal.

Pushpinder Bagga: Varun is extremely talented and a
professional animator. I have worked with
Varun on quite a few projects now and he
has amazed me with his work, creativity and
timely collateral’s. It’s not just the animation-
Varun bring along a full stack skills right
from the story boarding to the marketing
gigs that can be introduced in the videos.
Varun did a lot of impressive designs which
included theme based videos, emails,
infographics, posters, mockups, 3D render
etc – very very impressed. Connecting with
him is easy -Skype! See less.”

[5]. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

respondent is earning not less than Rs.1.5 lakhs.

[6]. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent

submitted that the petitioner is a qualified lady having

qualification i.e. B.Com, MBA and B.Ed. Petitioner has not

worked intentionally so as to extract maintenance from the

respondent.

3 of 5
::: Downloaded on – 12-05-2019 06:49:48 :::
CR No.1169 of 2019 4

[7]. I have considered the submissions made by learned

counsel for the parties.

[8]. For making assessment in respect of monthly income at

this stage, some guess work has to be made for assessing

prima facie material for the grant of maintenance pendente lite.

It is a settled principle of law that the husband has moral

obligation to maintain his wife, at the same time the

maintenance cannot be for undue enrichment of the

respondent-wife so as to impede likely re-conciliation in the

future. In fact maintenance pendente lite is meant to prevent

destitution and vagrancies of the wife. It is equally true that the

wife is also entitled to lead his life according to the status of her

husband. Since the petitioner-wife is a qualified lady, therefore,

she is not expected to remain idle to squeeze out the husband.

[9]. Parents of the respondents are getting their pensions

as father of the respondent is a retired government officer and

his mother has also retired from the government job. Prima

facie material at this stage arising out from the profile of the

respondent would make him liable to pay enhanced

maintenance pendente lite.

[10]. Keeping in view the facts and over all prima facie

material on record, I deem it appropriate to increase

maintenance pendente lite to the tune of Rs.20,000/- per month.

4 of 5
12-05-2019 06:49:48 :::
CR No.1169 of 2019 5

The amount of litigation expenses shall remain the same.

[11]. With the aforesaid modification, this revision petition is

disposed of.

May 08, 2019 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH)
Atik JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No

5 of 5
::: Downloaded on – 12-05-2019 06:49:48 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation