FAO No. 3133 of 2019 (OM) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

FAO No. 3133 of 2019 (OM)
Date of Decision: 13.5.2019

Manoj Kumar …….Appellant

Vs.

Sunita …….Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present: Mr. Manoj Makkar, Advocate
for the appellant.

*****

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL)

This appeal is directed against the order dated 13.3.2019 passed

by the Family Court, Rohtak by which the application filed by the

respondent-wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘Act’ for

short) for seeking grant of maintenance pendente lite and litigation

expenses, has been allowed and she has been awarded ` 8,000/- per month

towards maintenance pendente lite and Rs. 11,000/- towards litigation

expenses

In brief, marriage of the appellant with the respondent was

solemnized on 14.1.2011 at Bahadurgarh District Jhajjar as per Hindu rites

and ceremonies. There is no child out of the said wedlock. The appellant-

husband has filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act in the Court at

Rohtak for seeking a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. During the

said proceedings, the respondent has filed an application under Section 24

of the Act for seeking maintenance pendente lite alleging that the appellant

1 of 3
10-06-2019 02:26:29 :::
FAO No. 3133 of 2019 (OM) -2-

is employed in Indian Army and is drawing basic salary of ` 45,000/- per

month. The respondent has alleged that she has no source of income.

Although the appellant has alleged that the respondent has completed her

law and has enrolled herself with the Bar Association of Punjab and

Haryana, Chandigarh, however, it has been noticed by the Court below that

she has not started practicing law.

Be that as it may, learned counsel for the appellant has

submitted that the applications filed by the respondent under Section 125 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘SectionCr.P.C.’ for short) and Section 12 of

Protection of Women from SectionDomestic Violence Act, 2005 (‘2005 Act’ for

short) have been dismissed by the Court below on the ground that the

respondent had lived only for five days with the appellant and in such a

short span of time the Court cannot presume that she was subjected to

cruelty.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and after

examining the record, are of the considered opinion that the concept of

maintenance under Section 24 of the Act is altogether different from the

concept of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and Section 12 of 2005

Act. Under Section 24 of the Act, either of the spouse can claim

maintenance and litigation expenses if the spouse claiming maintenance and

litigation expenses has no means of earning. The said maintenance is

granted during the pendency of the proceedings and comes to an end with

the culmination of the proceedings. Thus, in our view, there is no error on

the part of the Court below in awarding ` 8,000/- per month towards

maintenance pendente lite and ` 11,000/- towards litigation expenses to the

respondent keeping in view the salary of the appellant to the tune of

2 of 3
10-06-2019 02:26:29 :::
FAO No. 3133 of 2019 (OM) -3-

` 45,000/- per month. No other point has been argued.

In view of the aforesaid observations, the present appeal is

hereby dismissed with no costs.

(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN)
JUDGE

(HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
May 13, 2019 JUDGE
Gurpreet

Whether speaking /reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No

3 of 3
10-06-2019 02:26:29 :::