SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ranjeet Kumar Soni vs Puja Devi on 16 January, 2019


Ranjeet Kumar Soni, son of Late Dhaneshwar Prasad, resident of village-
Shitalpur, P.S.- Taraiya, District-Saran

… … Appellant/s
Puja Devi wife of Ranjeet Kumar Soni, daughter of Ashok Prasad Sah,
resident of village- Shitalpur, P.S.-Taraiya, District- Saran. At present resident
of village- Maharajganj, P.S.- Chapra Muffasil, District- Saran

… … Respondent/s

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shyamal Prakash, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.

Date : 16-01-2019

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. This application under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for setting

aside the order dated 08.02.2018 passed by the learned Principal

Judge, Family Court, Saran at Chapra in Divorce Case No. 07 of

2017 whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay Rs. 8000/-

per month as maintenance pendente lite to his wife and minor

son during pendency of the proceeding.

3. The petitioner has filed an application under

Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Court of Principal

Judge, Family Court, Saran at Chapra vide Divorce Case No. 07

of 2017 seeking a decree of divorce from his wife on the ground

of cruelty. It is an admitted fact that the couple has got a son
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.91 of 2019 dt.16-01-2019

from the wedlock in question.

4. After notice, the respondent filed an

application before the court below under Section 24 of the

Hindu Marriage Act seeking ad interim maintenance of rupees

thirty thousand per month towards maintenance for herself and

her minor son. The respondent claims that the petitioner being a

a goldsmith earns rupees sixty thousand per month and has got

agricultural income of rupees twenty thousand per month from

his five Bigha land. She has urged that she has no means to

maintain herself and her son. In reply, the petitioner took a plea

that he is a landless person having no piece of agricultural land

and he earns only rupees three thousand per month by selling

jewellery boxes for which he wanders here and there.

5. Having considered the rival claims, the

learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Saran at Chapra vide

impugned order dated 08.02.2016 directed the petitioner to pay

rupees eight thousand per month as maintenance pendente lite to

the respondent for maintaining herself and her son.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted

that the impugned order passed by the court below is perverse as

there was no material before the court on the basis of which it

could have awarded rupees eight thousand per month as
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.91 of 2019 dt.16-01-2019

maintenance pendente lite. He contended that the trial court has

failed to assess per month income of the petitioner before

passing the impugned order.

7. Considering the submissions made above

and the materials on record, I find that the respondent has

claimed that her marriage with the petitioner had been

performed on 04.12.2015. She has alleged that immediately

after marriage, the petitioner and his family members demanded

rupees two lacs as dowry and for non-fulfillment of the same

she was subjected to cruelty in various ways. Somehow, the

respondent managed to live in her matrimonial home and out of

the wedlock a son was also born. Subsequently, she was ousted

from her matrimonial home after snatching her ornaments and

clothes. The respondent has also claimed that earning of the

petitioner is rupees sixty thousand per month from the business

of gold and rupees twenty thousand per month from agricultural


8. I further find that it is not the plea of the

petitioner that the respondent has got any source of income. It is

also not disputed that the petitioner is doing business. Though,

the respondent claims that he deals in gold, the petitioner has

taken a plea that he sells jewellery boxes and earns only rupees
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.91 of 2019 dt.16-01-2019

three thousand per month.

9. The object of maintenance pendente lite is to

provide financial assistance to the needy spouse to maintain

herself. Once the court finds a prima facie case that the indigent

spouse is unable to maintain herself, it is required to exercise its

discretionary power to award proper ad interim maintenance.

10. In the instance case, award of rupees eight

thousand per month to the wife and minor son of the petitioner

as maintenance allowance considering that the petitioner

admittedly is doing business cannot be held to be either

excessive or unreasonable.

11. In that view of the matter, I see no merit in

this application. It is dismissed accordingly.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
Md. S/SKSuman.

Uploading Date 22.01.2019
Transmission Date

Leave a Reply

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

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


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