HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 3145/2017
Hitesh Kumar S/o Shri Ravindra Kumar, Age-37 years, By Caste-
Dabgar, R/o Sabji Mandi, Behind police station, Abu Road,
Smt. Kripa W/o Hitesh Kumar, By Caste-Dabgar, R/o Sabji Mandi,
Behind police station, Abu Road, District-Sirohi.
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ashok Patel
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Singh
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA
Appellant-husband has laid this appeal under Section 28 of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’) to challenge
order dated 18.05.2017, passed by District Judge, Sirohi (for
short, ‘learned Court below’), whereby learned Court below has
partly allowed application of respondent-wife under Section 24 of
the Act in a petition for dissolution of marriage laid by the
In the application, it is inter-alia, averred by the respondent-
wife that appellant is earning Rs.50,000/- per month, and
therefore, she may be allowed Rs.20,000/- as maintenance
pendente lite. The application is contested by the appellant.
Learned Court below, after examining the matter and taking into
account a very vital fact that respondent-wife is living in penury as
she is unable to maintain herself, has partly allowed the petition
(2 of 2) [CMA-3145/2017]
and granted Rs.7,000/- per mensom as maintenance pendente lite
and Rs.500/- per day expenses for attending proceedings of the
I have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as
learned counsel for the respondent and perused the impugned
Upon perusal of the impugned order, in my opinion, learned
Court below has assessed maintenance pendente lite moderately
in the present era of inflation, which cannot be categorized as
infirm or exorbitant. In the matter of grant of maintenance under
Section 24 of the Act to a spouse, the only consideration is that
the spouse seeking maintenance must not have independent
income sufficient for her/his support. Once the Court reaches to
the conclusion that there is no independent source of income of
the spouse seeking maintenance, then, the only discretion left
with the Court is to quantify maintenance amount.
Learned Court below, while considering the legislative intent
and admitted fact that respondent is having no independent
income to maintain herself, has granted reasonable amount of
maintenance pendent lite, which requires no interference in
exercise of appellate jurisdiction.
In totality, I record my satisfaction about impugned order as
the same does not suffer from any error much less manifest error
of law on fact.
Consequently, the appeal fails and same is hereby dismissed.
Anil Kumar Choudhary/26
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)