CR No.4603 of 2018(OM) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.4603 of 2018(OM)
Date of Decision: 06.05.2019
Inderjit ….Petitioner
Versus
Mona Yadav …..Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH
Present:Mr. Vikram Singh Yadav, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Vishal Thakur, Advocate for
Mr. Sudhir Rana, Advocate
for the respondent.
****
RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.
[1]. Petitioner has assailed the order dated 09.05.2018
passed by Additional District Judge, Rewari allowing the
application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act thereby
granting ad interim maintenance to the respondent and to the
child @ Rs.20,000/- per month from the date of application and
Rs.20,000/- towards litigation expenses.
[2]. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on
1 of 4
12-05-2019 18:47:56 :::
CR No.4603 of 2018(OM) 2
19.04.2013 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Out of the
wedlock, a daughter namely Bhavika took birth on 28.01.2014
who is living in the company of the respondent wife. There is a
matrimonial discord between the parties, resulting in filing of
petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act by the
petitioner.
[3]. An application was filed by the respondent under
Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Husband petitioner is
serving as Assistant Professor in the Department of Bio-
informatics, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and was
drawing gross salary of Rs.52,886/- per month in October 2016.
Respondent wife is also serving as Assistant Master (Maths) in
Sainik School, Rewari. Her salary w.e.f. April 2018 is
approximately Rs.40,000/- per month.
[4]. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has cleared arrears of maintenance till the month of
March 2019. However, this fact could not be verified by learned
counsel for the respondent as the respondent has not attended
the Court despite orders dated 20.08.2018, 14.11.2018 and
12.03.2019.
[5]. It will remain debatable issue whether gross salary of
the petitioner has also increased after implementation of 7th Pay
Commission or not and the financial status as on date.
2 of 4
12-05-2019 18:47:57 :::
CR No.4603 of 2018(OM) 3
[6]. Evidently, both the parties are serving. Respondent wife
is entitled to live as per status of her husband. Grant of
maintenance pendente lite is not aimed to enrich any of the
spouse, rather the same is made to prevent destitution and
vagrancies. Daughter aged about 5 years is living in the
company of the respondent. It is the moral obligation of the
petitioner to maintain his wife and child. Wife is earning
approximately Rs.40,000/- per month, sufficiency of income to
maintain herself and the minor would be debatable as they are
also entitled to live as per status of husband/petitioner.
Maintenance of the child requires day to day expenditure
towards health, education and overall personality of the child.
Custody issue of the child including maintenance is a dynamic
process and it keeps on changing with the passage of time.
Increase in the age of the child would require increase in
expenses as well. There cannot be any mathematical formula to
assess contingent expenses for the welfare and upliftment of
the minor prospects in terms of health, education and overall
development.
[7]. Even if, it is found that respondent is a working woman
and drawing salary of Rs.40,000/- per month approximately, the
maintenance of Rs.20,000/- can be fixed for both for health,
education and overall development of the child keeping in view
3 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 12-05-2019 18:47:57 :::
CR No.4603 of 2018(OM) 4
the future prospects of the child and likely expenses to be
incurred for living by the wife according to status of husband.
[8]. In view of aforesaid, this revision petition is disposed of.
06.05.2019 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH)
Prince JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 12-05-2019 18:47:57 :::