HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2715/2019
Rohit Kumar Alias Pintu Son Of Shrawan Kumar, Aged About 27
Years, By Caste Kumawat Resident Of Balakdas Ki Dhani,
Ajabpura, Tehsil Dantaramgarh, District Sikar.
—-Appellant
Versus
1. Sadhna Devi W/o Rohit Kumar Alias Pintu, Aged About 26
Years, By Caste Kumawat Resident Of Balakdas Ki Dhani,
Ajabpura, Tehsil Dantaramgarh, District Sikar. Presently
Residing In Father’s Home Village Shishyu, Tehsil
Dantaramgarh, District Sikar.
2. Shaket Kumar Son Of Rohit Kumar, Aged About 4 months,
Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Sadhna Devi W/o
Rohit Kumar Alias Pintu Resident Of Balakdas Ki Dhani,
Ajabpura, Tehsil Danta Ramgarh, District Sikar. Presently
Residing In Father’s Home Village Shishyu, Tehsil
Dantaramgarh, District Sikar.
—-Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Shri Sanjay Mishra
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Order
02/07/2019
BY THE COURT : (PER HON’BLE DHADDHA, J.)
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant
husband against the order of the learned Family Court, Sikar
passed on 4.5.2019. By this order, the learned Family Court
decided the Matrimonial Civil Suit No.147/2017 filed u/s 18 and 21
of the Hindu Adoptions and SectionMaintenance Act, 1956 (for short “the
Act”) with the directions to the appellant to pay Rs.6,000/- per
(Downloaded on 08/07/2019 at 10:43:43 PM)
(2 of 4) [CMA-2715/2019]
month maintenance to the respondent No.1 and Rs.3,000/- per
month to the respondent No.2, who is minor son represented
through his natural guardian mother w.e.f. March, 2017 for which
respondent No.1 is entitled to receive the maintenance on behalf
of respondent No.2. It was directed that the outstanding amount
of maintenance w.e.f. March, 2017 to April, 2019 would be paid in
four equal installments within two years. The maintenance
amount with effect from May, 2019 would be paid on every 5 th of
the month to the respondent No.1 or the amount would be
deposited in bank on her furnishing the bank account number to
the appellant. It was further directed to the appellant to pay the
maintenance amount to the respondent No.1 till divorce and if
the respondent No.1 divorced, then to remarry. The maintenance
amount for respondent No.2 would continue till he gets majority.
In case, the respondent wife is getting any maintenance by other
order/s, that shall be adjusted from this amount.
2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the
marriage between the parties was solemnized on 11.5.2011
according to the Hindu rites and customs at village Shishyu,
Dantaramgarh. Right from the very beginning, the behaviour of
mother-in-law was not good. Her in-laws demanded for sufficient
dowry but she always tolerated. From the wedlock of their
marriage, one male child namely Sumit was born on 30.11.2014.
Respondent No.1 gave a birth to the second child in her parent’s
home on 20.11.2016. Respondent wife lodged FIR No.223/2016 at
Police Station Ranauli against the appellant and her mother-in
-law for offence u/s 498A, 406 and 323 SectionIPC.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
impugned order dated 4.5.2019 is illegal, arbitrary and against the
(Downloaded on 08/07/2019 at 10:43:43 PM)
(3 of 4) [CMA-2715/2019]
material available on record. Learned counsel submitted that the
respondent wife left the matrimonial home on 14.9.2016 without
information to the appellant. He submitted that the respondent
wife does not want to reside with the appellant. The appellant is
earning only Rs.7,000/- per month from the shop. Learned
counsel for the appellant at this stage submitted that the appellant
cannot pay a sum of Rs.19,000/- per month as apart from an
amount of Rs.9,000/- per month (Rs.6,000/- for wife and Rs.
3,000/- for the child), a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month has been
ordered to be paid towards the arrears of maintenance from the
date of filing of the application. So, the maintenance awarded by
the learned Family Court be set aside.
4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the
arguments advanced by the appellant, perused the impugned
order and the material available on record.
5. The appellant did not establish any evidence in the
learned Family Court that the respondent wife had an adequate
source of income to maintain herself and her minor son. Learned
Family Court in its order observed that the appellant had given
statement before police that he had a shop for light and water
fittings at Palsana. These facts were affirmed by him in his cross
examination. Learned Family Court also observed that the
appellant had produced fee receipt of his son of Rs.3300/- for 1 st
term. This shows that the appellant has sufficient source of
income. It is moral and legal duty of husband to maintain his wife
and children. Respondent wife also have to look after her minor
children. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the
appellant prayed that the appellant cannot pay a sum of
Rs.19,000/- per month as apart from an amount of Rs.9,000/- per
(Downloaded on 08/07/2019 at 10:43:43 PM)
(4 of 4) [CMA-2715/2019]
month (Rs.6,000/- for wife and Rs. 3,000/- for the child), a sum
of Rs.10,000/- per month has been ordered to be paid towards the
arrears of maintenance from the date of filing of the application. If
that be so, it would be open to the appellant to make a suitable
application before the Family Court to reduce the monthly amount
of arrears to a reasonable sum for being paid in future. So, the
above mentioned maintenance awarded by the learned Family
Court does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. So, the
appeal being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.
6. Hence, the appeal along with stay application stands
dismissed.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J
RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN /17/67
(Downloaded on 08/07/2019 at 10:43:43 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
