WPs 2026/186338-16 1 Common Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 2026/2018
Shalini W/o Anandrao Kosurkar,
Aged about 51 years, Occ-Service,
R/o House of Shri Gulabrao Asurkar,
Ashirwad Layout, Nagpur Road, Warora,
Tah. Warora, Dist. Chandrapur. PETITIONER
…..VERSUS…..
Anandrao S/o Patruji Kosurkar,
Aged about 54 years, Occ-Cultivation and
Business, R/o Chandankheda,
Tah. Bhadrawati, Dist. Chandrapur. RESPONDENT
Shri H.V. Thakur, counsel for petitioner.
Shri A.A. Dhawas, counsel for respondent.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6338/2016
Anandrao S/o Patruji Kosurkar,
Aged about 54 years, Occ-Cultivation,
R/o Chandankheda, Tahsil Bhadrawati,
Dist. Chandrapur. PETITIONER
…..VERSUS…..
Shalini W/o Anandrao Kosurkar,
Aged about 51 years, Occ-Service,
R/o House of Shri Gulabrao Asurkar,
Ashirwad Layout, Nagpur Road, Warora,
Tahsil Warora, District Chandrapur. RESPONDENT
Shri A.A. Dhawas, counsel for petitioner.
Shri H.V. Thakur, counsel for respondent.
::: Uploaded on – 01/08/2019 01/08/2019 21:09:22 :::
WPs 2026/186338-16 2 Common Judgment
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.
DATE : 30TH JULY, 2019.
ORAL JUDGMENT
Both the writ petitions are heard finally by issuing RULE.
2. A challenge has been raised to the order dated 18.07.2016
passed by the trial Court on an application filed under Section 24 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking grant of maintenance pendente lite.
3. The petitioner and the respondent were married on
26.05.1991. From that marriage, they have two daughters and one son.
The eldest daughter is now stated to have been married. The younger
daughter and the son are stated to be pursuing their education at Nagpur.
The petitioner in Writ Petition No.2026 of 2018 is employed as the
Primary School Teacher with Panchayat Samiti, Warora. She is receiving
total income of Rs.44,955/- and net income of Rs.28,335/-. The
respondent in the said writ petition is stated to be an agriculturist who is
cultivating land to the extent of 5 Hectare 46 R and is also running a
Krishi Sewa Kendra. According to the petitioner, the respondent is
earning an amount of Rupees Ten Lakhs annually. During pendency of
the proceedings for divorce filed by the respondent-Husband, the
petitioner on 07.01.2016 filed an application for grant of maintenance
::: Uploaded on – 01/08/2019 01/08/2019 21:09:22 :::
WPs 2026/186338-16 3 Common Judgment
pendente lite. She claimed an amount of Rs.5,000/- each for the children
and litigation expenses of Rs.25,000/-. According to her, the children
were residing with her and she was spending amounts towards their
education. Reply was filed by the husband opposing the said application.
It was stated that as the petitioner was earning Rs.28,335/- per month,
she was not entitled for any interim maintenance. The trial Court by its
order dated 18.07.2016 recorded a prima-facie finding that the salary of
the petitioner was not sufficient to take care of her maintenance as she
was incurring expenses towards education and maintenance of the college
going children. The trial Court therefore awarded a sum of Rs.2,500/-
per month as interim maintenance. The wife not being satisfied with the
quantum of maintenance has filed Writ Petition No.2026 of 2018 while
the husband who is also aggrieved by the aforesaid order has challenged
the same by filing Writ Petition No.6338 of 2016.
4. Shri H.V. Thakur, learned counsel for the wife submitted that
though the petitioner was engaged as a Primary School Teacher and was
getting net salary of Rs.28,335/-, the same was insufficient to maintain
herself and her children. He stated that the eldest daughter has been
married while the other two children are pursuing their education at
Nagpur. He referred to the affidavit filed on behalf of the wife alongwith
details of the expenses incurred towards the education of the children.
::: Uploaded on – 01/08/2019 01/08/2019 21:09:22 :::
WPs 2026/186338-16 4 Common Judgment
He further submitted that since the husband was owning substantial
agricultural land and was also running a Krishi Sewa Kendra, he ought to
be directed to pay higher amount of maintenance. It was thus submitted
that the impugned order deserves to be suitably modified.
5. On the other hand, Shri A.A. Dhavas, learned counsel for the
husband challenged the impugned order on the ground that as the wife
was employed as a Primary School Teacher and was receiving regular
salary, there was no reason to direct the husband to pay maintenance.
The wife was not entitled to rely upon the provisions of Section 24 of the
said Act to seek interim maintenance. He further submitted that from the
income tax returns of the husband, it was clear that the figures stated by
the wife were exaggerated and he was not receiving the amount of
income as stated by her. He therefore submitted that the impugned order
was liable to be set aside.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and
I have perused the documents placed on record. The adjudication at
present is at an interlocutory stage and the question to be considered is
grant of maintenance pendente lite. Insofar as the wife is concerned, the
salary certificate placed on record indicates that she is earning net income
of Rs.28,335/-. It is not in dispute that the eldest daughter is now
married while the other two children are taking education at Nagpur.
::: Uploaded on – 01/08/2019 01/08/2019 21:09:22 :::
WPs 2026/186338-16 5 Common Judgment
They are being looked after by their mother. The trial Court has recorded
a prima-facie finding that net income of Rs.28,335/- is insufficient to
maintain the wife and the children together. The income tax returns
placed on record by the husband indicate the gross income as well as net
income earned by him. By taking a prima-facie view of the matter and in
the light of the fact that the wife is required to maintain herself as well as
take care of the education of both the children who are studying at
Nagpur, an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month as interim maintenance
would serve the ends of justice. This amount is determined without
prejudice to the rights of the parties and after taking into consideration
the employment of the wife. It is also the responsibility of the father of
the children to ensure that the education of the children is not affected
due to financial constraints.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 18.07.2016 is partly
modified. It is held that the husband is liable to pay interim maintenance
of Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife. Rest of the order stands maintained.
The proceedings in H.M.P. No.110 of 2015 are expedited. The wife is at
liberty to withdraw the amount of maintenance deposited by the husband
before the trial Court. After taking that amount into consideration, the
arrears of maintenance in terms of this order be cleared within a period of
three months.
::: Uploaded on – 01/08/2019 01/08/2019 21:09:22 :::
WPs 2026/186338-16 6 Common Judgment
8. The Writ Petitions are disposed of. Rule is made absolute in
aforesaid terms. The parties to bear their own costs.
(A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
APTE
::: Uploaded on – 01/08/2019 01/08/2019 21:09:22 :::